We generally afford one another the "freedom to make our own choices" where those choices have little or no impact on the well being of others. Our disagreement would more likely be around whether or not the choice to abort represents this type of choice.
Yes.
You know, I started that last post with a statement about you and I being somewhat attuned on the subject of humanity and then deleted it because it was distracting to the. You and I both appreciate, I think, the complexity of this issue.
To choose is human and not only a freedom but unavoidable. To be given the freedom to choose without sanction by others or society at large is not. As a member of humanity our choices inevitably engage our member community. This is also an aspect of humanity. Once engaged, it is an obligation of society to approve, withhold approval, disapprove, or take a neutral stance.
Society has a variety of approaches it can take. It can pass laws. Or individuals in society can impose their own individual sanctions. Or powerful groups of individuals can apply informal societal sanctions, AKA "bully." I come at it from a libertarian and capitalist perspective. I believe that, in the long run, we are best off acting as individuals in the marketplace of products and services and the marketplace of ideas. Yes, that can lead to some unfortunate incidents, but our systems are self-correcting and the overall result is better if we don't try to over-regulate behavior. In communist societies, all our choices are made for us. Ain't that fun.
The freedom to choose without the imposition of societal restriction might seem fundamental to a truly autonomous person. However, that is not considerate of persons with an extremely external center of control who often have problems with impulse control as well.
I take your point. The question is what we do about it. For which sort of folks do we design our systems? If we design around your external LOC folks, we get communism. If we design around the rest of us, we get some sorry incidents when the uncontrolled run amok. It seems to me that the more we try to pass laws to regulate every little thing, the more credence we give to the uncontrolled that if it ain't illegal, it's OK. If that's not the message we want to send, then we have to consciously allow many things we disapprove of to be legal, albeit undesirable. IMO tis better to suffer the occasional idiot who would abort a viable fetus as toenail clippings than to go down the path of having the government involved in reproduction decisions. When the government gets involved in reproductive decisions, who knows where that may go. Eugenics, maybe. We've been there before. Forced abortion like they have in China, perhaps. Nasty business, that. I think the better course is to leave reproductive decisions to individual choice even though that can result in welfare mothers with fourteen kids screaming at Marion Barry about their rights, painful as that is to witness. If we want perfect safety, the "trade-off" is our freedom--all of it. |
