The Abortion Debate

Abstract

Abortion has provided one of the most noxious, disturbing, and unending of all American moral and legal struggles. The issue forces us to think about the most difficult kind of ethical issues, e.g., the moral status of the fetus and the meaning of human "life" and "personhood." The win-at-all-costs attitude among the leading advocacy groups has created gross stereotypes. While most arguments heard today were also heard prior to the Roe vs. Wade decision, the tone has radically changed. Better organization has meant hotter rhetoric and a nastier public style. We need to move the abortion debate along; it is now as stagnate as it is nasty. We need creative discussion and realistic compromise. The pre-Roe arguments in favor of choice have changed. Then, the movement to legalize abortion rested on the following: 1) illegal abortions were killing and maiming women; 2) women should have a backup to ineffective contraception; 3) the number of unwanted pregnancies should be reduced; only wanted children should be born, as a matter of child welfare; 4) women should have the right to make the abortion decision; 5) everything possible should be done to change the economic and domestic circumstances forcing women into unwanted pregnancies. The argument benefited women, children, and society. The many abortion myths that have since taken prominence cloud an already difficult issue. The ongoing tension rests with the conflict between the moral and legal issues. Is it possible to combine legal freedom and seriousness about the moral questions? Only if we recognize the equality of both positions' moral traditions, accept public discussion, the need for compromise, the need to do everything possible to change the economic and social circumstance leading to the abortion choice, and the need for meaningful counseling of women considering abortion.