Some bloggers make me so mad I want to spit nails. Some women make me so mad I usually let a few 4 letter words fly (only in my head, of course). So what happens when it’s a woman blogger who makes me mad?
Don’t ask.
I can’t believe that there are people out there like Amanda Marcotte. Amanda is one of the contributors to the Pandagon, and the author of this little gem here.
She takes the position that having an abortion (and she does clarify that she means the actual procedure, not just the right to have one) is a moral good because women are thinking of their own well-being and the well-being of their families when they make the decision to have one.
What about the well being of the baby whose life she’s choosing to end?
It seems to me that having an abortion is, in most (not all) cases, an extremely selfish act.
She says:
Women who get abortions should be recognized as people who can accurately weigh their choices and make the most moral one.
Then she goes on to laud the unsung “heroes” – the men and women who perform the abortions.
There are really no words for this kind of woman.
Blogs that link here: Pursuing Holiness, Dumb Ox News, Right Voices, and Third World County.
There are words. Amanda Marcotte fancies herself a “progressive” and a feminist, I’m sure. Let her talk. The more she talks, the more she harms her causes and the less relevant she becomes. Perhaps the only reason you even found her opinion is that she was so vicious and profane on her personal blog that she “resigned” from John Edwards’ presidential campaign staff.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/02/amanda_marcotte_resigns_from_edwards_campaign/
My word for her, after reading about “Christofascists” and other endearing terms for Christians who disagree with her (her tirades against the Roman Catholic Church are my favorite) on her blog, is “viper”.
[Reply]
Sigh.
The religious right has succeeded in demonizing people in order to further their causes. For instance, women who have had an abortion are painted as shameless whores who sleep with many different men and use abortion as a form of birth control. They paint gay men as sex-crazed, drug addicted party boys who spend most of their lives in clubs, drinking and grinding with other sex crazed drug addicted homos.
Although both of the above might exist, to generalize and assume ALL people in those catagories are the same is a terrible mistake.
I very much understand what Amanda is talking about- from personal experience:
At my second church job, I became very good friends with a woman from the parish. She was the single mother of two boys, ages 2 and 4. Her husband died from a brain anurism a year before I met her. Recently, she had been diagnosed with lung cancer.
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, she was raped on the way home from her THIRD job that day. She became pregnant and had one hell of a decision before her.
Two children already, cancer ridden and now pregnant. She decided to abort the baby, not willing to bring a child into this situation.
I tend to believe that was the moral decision in this instance. There are those who’ll scream and shout that she did the wrong thing, but my opinion will never sway.
Less than a year later, Christa died and the two children have been in and out of foster care since then. I lost track of them a few years later, and have no idea where they ended up. I think it’s a very good thing she didn’t bring that third child into the world, into that awful situation.
We don’t know what people are going through and it is wrong to generalize and assume we know what is best for them.
In closing, one of my favorite Gospel quotes, used this past weekend at church:
“Stop judging and you will not be judged. Stop condemning and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven. Give and gifts will be given to you; a good measure, packed together, shaken down, and overflowing, will be poured into your lap. For the measure with which you measure will in return be measured out to you.”
[Reply]
Sigh right back.
The religious right has succeeded in demonizing people in order to further their causes.
I’m not part of the religious right. I’m not part of the religious left, either. I don’t disagree with you that there are people who demonize other people. But I really don’t think that’s relevant.
Although both of the above might exist, to generalize and assume ALL people in those catagories are the same is a terrible mistake.
I agree.
I understand your position. Especially in a case like the one you mentioned. I just disagree with you. I don’t think women who have abortions are evil. I think they made a bad choice, but I don’t think they’re this awful plague that we must rid ourselves of.
A woman like Amanda Marcotte is in a completely different place when it comes to an issue like this. I don’t want to say she’s evil, but she comes pretty darn close. She’s not pro-choice, she’s pro-abortion. There’s a difference.
[Reply]
If I understand Ms Marcotte correctly, what she’s saying is that it is morally proper to prioritise the welfare of human beings over the existence of a microscopic cluster of cells. In many cases, the resulting calculation may indicate that abortion is the best solution. In which case, abortion would be the most moral path.
At least I think that that’s what she’s saying…
Whether you agree with this argument or not depends, of course, on whether you accept its premises concerning the relative worth of human and blastula – but the logic itself seems sound. And from this perspective, if you live in a society that dislikes abortion, having one could even be considered a courageous action.
[Reply]
Here’s a rarity: I see both parties’ points, even as a strong pro-lifer. There are many instances where a child is born into a very tough life and it may have been better for them not to be born.
However, who are we to make that decision? (Please bear in mind that I believe life begins at conception.) I have a dear friend who is not only a rape baby, but the rape was incestual. Her mother was unmarried and a drug addict. She could have aborted her, but instead she gave her up for adoption. This friend grew up in a loving home and is now married, expecting, and working with children. All I’m saying is that there’s no way we can know if their life will be good or bad because we can’t tell the future. We have no right to determine whether our child will live or die.
[Reply]
i saw a similar post over at feministe. although i am prochoice and a feminist, i had a HUGE problem couching abortion as a moral good as well.
[Reply]
There are radicals on both sides….
She is a fine example.
[Reply]
However, who are we to make that decision?
In this situation, failure to have an abortion would be a positive decision to have a baby. Who are we to make that decision?
The answer is the same in both cases. “We” (referring to the mothers-to-be) are the people who are stuck with the decision. Whether we have the “right” to do so is irrelevant – we have the responsibility.
She could have aborted her, but instead she gave her up for adoption.
My point is not that she was wrong to do that, but that it was right for it to be her decision.
Remember, there are people out there (such as the Chinese govt) who feel that forced abortion is a good thing. I personally don’t like abortion, so I’m keen not to give these folk any legal authority over other people’s reproduction.
If we legislate that women cannot have abortions, we have no moral high ground if it’s ever legislated that women must have abortions. For this reason if nothing else, I feel that legislating against abortion is a bad idea – it sets an absolutely dreadful precedent.
This is IMO a pretty sound general principle. At present, the only arguments against abortion are based on religious precepts or (like my own reservations) on personal distaste. If we legislate on that basis, we give tacit authorisation to everyone else to legislate based on their personal convictions.
Read up on Queens Mary and Elizabeth I of England if you want to see where that leads…
[Reply]
Hmmm….. I have male genitalia, dare I comment on this issue…not a reasonable course of action, but what the hell.
I am not comfortable with abortion. If I had to be pegged I would say I am not “pro-life”, but definitely not “pro-choice”. I understand that there are circumstances where there seems to be no good option, and in those cases I try to demonstrate restraint, and empathy. I also know that there are cases where it is a matter of pure convenience, I am a bit less sympathetic to those situations, but since I don’t walk in their moccassins, I keep my thoughts to myself. I know there are case where it is a medical necessity, and in those cases I wish grace for the sadness that must accompany such a loss.
I will say I don’t agree with the findings of Roe v Wade that abortion is a Constitutional right based on the 9th amendment. I know many agree and disagree with me. I do believe that minor children should have to notify their parents, unless it is obvoius the girl was raped or the parent poses an imminent danger to the girl if she proceeds.
Life is a series of choices. Sexual behavior, and if my wife reads this, she’ll cream me, is also a choice, and there are consequences even with the multitude of birth control options, among them a vasectomy. Abortion is a choice. The individuals that make that choice, and the society that allows that choice will have to live with the outcomes of those choices.
I hope I didn’t offend any by offering a male perspective on a typically woman’s issue.
[Reply]
You certainly didn’t offend. All comments and opinions are welcome here! Thanks for joining the conversation.
[Reply]
I hope to join in again.
Thanks!
[Reply]
Amanda, I love your new blog. I find it easier to read, and I like the comment box.
The only things I miss are a “preview” button and…can I italicize words?
Well, we’ll see.
[Reply]
Thanks, Maureen. And yes, html does work in the comments.
[Reply]