Hi E,
I wanted to address a post that you made a day or two ago...I am on a slow link so I don't want to hunt it down. Anyway, it was on abortion and how removing government funding for it doesn't affect the "haves" it only affects the "have nots".
I am very pro-choice (in a broad definition of the term, but also where abortion is concerned)...However, I respect that some people may be anti-abortion. As long as they don't restrict individuals from making their own choice, I consider it their business. However, when we have government funding of abortion, we have effectively forced those individuals to provide real support for abortion through real dollars. I believe that if I expect the anti-abortion people to respect other's right to make a personal choice, we cannot force them to support something that they find abhorrent.
I am a strong believer that situational ethics should be avoided. This means that, just because something benefits me or supports my position, doesn't mean that it is right. the pro-choice issue is very important to me, I find that far too many people stop applying it (pro-choice) when it stops benefitting them directly. Again, I use the pro-choice term to mean far more than just the right to have an abortion. It can also mean the right to choose not to support others having an abortion.
OK, I am rambling...time to go to bed... |
