I am pro-choice for the same reason you are pro-life: My ethics demand it. The difference is that instead of fixating on the well being of an unborn embryo or fetus, my moral calculus looks at the well being of adult women, the quality of life of their possible future children, and the ramifications of the policy for all of society.
Any moral decision must weigh the well being of individuals and society. To calculate this we must compare the experience of a full grown woman with that of an unconscious embryo, or vaguely conscious fetus. We also must compare quality of the lives of children born at the wrong time into the wrong circumstances compared those born at the right time in the desired circumstances. In each of these cases, I believe the pro-choice stance brings about greater happiness for all.
In short I think the quality of life is more important than the quantity of life.
At the societal level, I believe forcing a half million women to give birth to unwanted children every year produces more long term pain and suffering than allowing a half a million abortions of (largely unconscious) embryos and fetuses. In fact, I think the term pro-life is a misnomer. It is more accurately described as “pro-birth” (indeed, pro forced-birth). In my eyes a genuine “pro-life” stance would also be interested in funding children’s health care, education, and ensuring that child has clean air and water. But there is a strange inverse correlation between pro-life leanings and support for child welfare.
So just as you see my pro-choice stance as a short sighted, moral mistake perhaps motivated by selfishness or a lack of understanding of what it means to be human, I see the pro-life stance as a short sighted, moral mistake motivated by a primitive understanding of what consciousness is and what it means to be human.
FAQ
If an embryo/fetus is alive at 20 weeks, isn’t it also alive at 19 weeks (and so on)?
Life is the not issue. Bacteria is alive. The issue is the complexity and experience of the organism. For the majority of a pregnancy, an embryo or fetus is less biologically complex and has had less conscious experience than a mouse, cat, or any other full grown mammal.
What about the pain and suffering of the fetus? What could be worse than death?
Lots of things can be worse than death. I do not believe embryos to be capable of thought or experience and I believe fetuses are far less cognizant than than the typical pro-lifer imagines. Fetuses are lost naturally all the time: While this is tragic for the parents who desired that child, we have no reason to believe it is tragic to the unborn children in any way. We have no memory of life before 1 year of age, we have no reason to think fetuses posses any higher order awareness.
However I do believe fetuses in late term abortions suffer (brief) pain, and this must be calculated in my moral opinion. I am amenable to laws protecting fetuses that could be birthed viably. However, as a man, I have little insight into the mental or emotional distress this may cause a woman (Which is why I do not think men should have any say in abortion laws in any way)
Isn’t abortion murder?
It is not murder. We have different definitions of an human embryo, a human fetus, and a human. Both scientifically and legally.
Aren’t unwanted children often a blessing?
That is true, in fact, I suspect a vast majority of unwanted children likely turn out to be a blessing in many ways (I, myself, was an unplanned pregnancy). But statistics show us unwanted children are slightly more likely to be 1) abused, 2) neglected 3) born to unfit parents 4) born into poverty 5) make it less likely the mother will escape poverty 6) linger in foster care 7) Suffer all the developmental problems these factors introduce. Even if an unwanted child is just 1% more likely to be abused or neglected, that translates into 5000 abused children each year. I believe a life time of abuse of even just one child produces more suffering than all half million abortions in any given year.
And as for blessings. Parents are free to have more children when they are ready. Most parents have a mere fraction of the children it is possible to have. We have a moral obligation to make the lives of the children they do have the best they can possibly be and this means birthing them into desired circumstances.
Isn’t there a waiting list for adoptions?
There is for healthy white babies. Currently, hundreds of thousands of unwanted children are languishing in foster care – It’s currently not feasible to add a half a million unwanted children a year (20% of all children born) to that equation. But more to the point, I simply do not value the quantity of life over the quality of life. In an overpopulated world I see little intrinsic good in forcing birth. The only argument that could sway me would be one that stated the value of keeping the embryo/fetus alive is greater than the well being of the woman for the 9 months of gestation. For previously stated reasons, I do not think it is.
What about the Bible?
First of all I do not recognize the moral authority of a book written by primitive cultures. However, even if I did, the Bible makes almost no mention of abortion and certainly does not equate it with murder. According to the Bible, the penalty for killing a woman’s unborn child by force (against her will) is paying a fine to her husband. Other verses in the bible suggests life begins at at the “first breath”, and a king recommends the drinking of “bitter water” (thought to induce miscarriage) as a test to see if a child belongs to a husband. Furthermore, 10-20 percent of pregnancies end in miscarriage. If God exists, he is the largest abortion provider on Earth.The notion that abortion is murder and Christians must oppose it was created wholesale by right wing political operatives to drive people to the voting booth (google the history of the pro-life movement) It is routinely abused by the most corrupt political charlatans (including the one in office right now)
No matter what we call it, (embryo, fetus, or human) it has a soul doesn’t it? This give it value beyond its flesh.
I think the word “soul” is useful in describing something difficult to put words. It is a useful word for our emotional selves, a poetic term for consciousness. But I see no reason to postulate that this exists independent of our body. However this is totally irrelevant because I do think brains exist, and I think they are capable of everything others feel souls are capable of: Love, heartache, joy, serenity, bravery, etc… So my ethical decision does not change whether or not these capabilities originate from something physical or something non-physical.
The most common retort I hear to this is one that is conveniently unprovable: That brains die and souls are immortal. I’m not sure how adding an immortal soul (that is unharmed by an abortion) to the equation makes ending a pregnancy more of a moral outrage. I suppose the idea is to imbue a fetus with fully formed personality and intellect and thus make it seem more like murder. In order for me to believe this, I would have to see something a soul can do that a brain cannot. It can’t speak at 6 months. It has no memories before the age of 2. It is not emotionally mature at the age of 6. Likewise, if the soul is the seat of our consciousness, it seems to deteriorate along with our brain, as it can no longer recognize loved ones when senility hits. Is there any quality of the “soul” that is not perfectly congruent with that of the brain? And if not, why postulate its existence at all?
As for life after death, what if I told you that when a baby is aborted that the soul does not go to heaven but instead moves into the next conceived child – thus it does not miss out on life at all? I have no proof of this, but I assure you it is true and demand you take it into account when creating our laws. Does this sound ridiculous? Now you know exactly how I feel when you tell me fetuses are imbued with souls at the moment of conception and fly away to heaven upon death and live for eternity. We can both make up rules all day about things we cannot see or prove, it’s not going to get us anywhere. (If you feel I grabbed the above example out of thin air, recall over a billion humans believe in reincarnation)