Abortion protesters descending upon Library Mall. Tim Tebow tackling his skeletal mother during the Super Bowl. Whether you're comfortable with it or not, the abortion issue is not going away. Never mind how many straddle the confused, moderate middle, the two opposing beliefs are too polarized to give up the fight.
Most Americans wish fewer abortions were performed in this country, yet few would agree to a blanket ban. So what can we do? How do we greatly reduce the number of abortions without a ban? The solutions are obvious, yet difficult. We must prevent many of the situations that result in abortion.
Some of the most realistic solutions to fighting abortion fill out the laundry list of reasons why I am a Democrat. I am a pro-life Democrat because Democrats enforce policies that help reduce abortions while actually continuing to care for people once they leave their mother's uterus. We must work to reduce poverty that dissuades many women from bringing new life into our world, teach realistic sex education in schools and increase the funding and efficacy of our adoption and foster care system.
Yet, even if we aggressively enact these solutions, abortion will not go away. Often women who choose to end a pregnancy do not do so because they are poor or don't have a loving, supporting partner. Many will always view abortion as a form of contraception, a choice anyone should be able to make at any time.
Although most of us agree no women should ever have an abortion because of outside pressures like poverty, the fight may never fully end.
In the meantime, we must try to bring some civility to the debate and discuss sanely.
This brings us to the original difficulty of the abortion dispute: The two major sides are arguing apples and rutabagas. Too often we forget this is an argument consisting of more than two plants. In this very column I have referred to the question as two-sided for the sake of brevity. But there are far more than two possibilities, two sides, two ideas in this, the most human of debates.
Many pro-lifers view unborn babies as living, or close enough to life to warrant a chance at it. Many pro-choicers view fetuses as clusters of cells, a stage in the progression from zygote to infant that is not ""living"" by any standard. The differences are, pardon the pun, stark. Imagine someone banned you from throwing rocks because they are considered alive and throwing them would qualify as murder. Imagine a world where children under the age of three could be brutally murdered by their parent with no legal punishment.
How can we argue the same ends with such disagreement about definitions? No number of Tim Tebow commercials, aborted fetus pictures or posters with wire hangers will convert those of us with firm beliefs.
What can change is the tone of discussion. However impossible it may be for some, we must respect people who promulgate differing viewpoints. In dealing with someone as sacred and unknown as an unborn child, the beginning of all human life, we must acknowledge that we cannot know everything absolutely. Even on minor details, sides must be willing to make concessions. Many pro-lifers carry a flawed argument in their desire to ban abortion but not punish women who have one. Many pro-choicers still maintain abortion is terrible enough that they would never have one, yet would allow others to have a procedure they deem appalling.
We must also refrain from removing half of the population from the discussion. Too often I hear that a man has no part in an abortion decision. Of course women, not men, carry children to term, and of course men will never know the difficulties of being pregnant. But men should be a part of every step of the life process. Denying men a role in the abortion discussion downplays their role as a potential father. Not to mention, men tend to have a role in creating their own children.
A man has a responsibility in deciding to use contraceptives, helping his partner if she is pregnant and caring for his child outside the womb. But if men are allowed, even forced, to stay on the sidelines during the first two trimesters of pregnancy during life-altering decisions, why not when the baby is born? Why not when the child continues to grow outside the womb?
I'm the first to admit women are the superior sex. A feminist, pro-choice, single mother raised me. But I was also raised without a father. Despite our lesser role in pregnancy, men are a part of the discussion, the issue, the decision of abortion. Just as we should be part of our children's lives outside the womb.
To millions of Americans, this topic is an issue of life and death. I simply ask that we not shut out those of us whose viewpoints complicate the issue of abortion—women and men.
Jamie Stark is a sophomore majoring in journalism and political science. Please send all responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
