Monday, October 09, 2006

Theocrats in the badlands

I am not one to wade too far into the great American pasttime of debating abortion, but I need to dip my toe in, since this is a theocracy issue.

I don't know anyone who is for abortion. I know people who believe the government shouldn't interfere, but I don't know anyone who is for abortion. I'm not saying they don't exist, in this country there is someone advocating every position.

Let's just say abortion sucks. It's no fun. I have never had one, but I am guessing that you hear very few "yippees!" in an abortion cinic. Whether or not it is morally wrong is debated by many, but there is no objective basis on which to form a reasonable consensus. In other words, reasonable people disagree on the morality.

Fine. BUT.

The fact that something sucks and may or may not be immoral doesn't mean you make it illegal. Making something illegal doesn't make it go away, it just allows you to imprison those that break the law. Whenever you make a law, you should be sure that it will decrease harm without overly infringing on individual choice. From an objective perspective, abortion is not a logical area for criminal legislation. Period.

HERE IS THE POINT: Theocrats wish to use the law to punish those that do not adhere to their beliefs. That is the very definition of a theocrat and that is what the religious extremists that push legislation are. Theocrats.

S. Dakota is the newest battle ground. On november 7th, the residents of S. Dakota will be voting on a referendum to outlaw abortion in that state. Do they know that is unconsitutional? Of course they do. But if there is one thing theocrats hate, it's the Constitution.

Granted it's not that big of a deal since only 12 people live in S. Dakota (give or take 3) and obviously the courts will have to enjoin its enforcement due to the fact that it's unconstitutional. But the fact remains that if 8 of the 12 people vote in favor of this law, then the remaining 4 people will be told, by law, that they must follow the religious dictates of the other 8.

Do I not recognize that abortion causes harm? Of course I do. However, no one in good conscious can say that based solely on objective criteria, making abortion illegal has a net positive effect on society. Unlike murder, unrestricted abortion does not cause a breakdown of the fabric of society. The only basis on which this law can be justified are purely religious ones.

If you want to see some of the really scummy tactics the ant-choice crowd is using in S. Dakota, check out letters to the editor in S. Dakota newspapers. These people really are vile.


Post a Comment

<< Home