|
 |
 |
| Written by YRG | ||
| Thursday, 11 June 2009 01:51 | ||
|
This speech has been getting a lot of play in the wake of the grisly church murder of Dr. George Tiller last week. Ragsdale's speech was so absurd that I felt compelled to respond to it, cribbing her words and adding some of my own. I posted the article on this site as "Rape is a blessing..." knowing that it was controversial and would get people angry. I felt that this concept was so bizarre and out there that perhaps it would shock people into seeing how absurd and divisive her words were when applied to abortion. Some people took this the wrong way and thought that I was endorsing rape. This could not be farther from the truth. Rape is a violent and horrible crime that no one should have to experience. However, I could not think of a better term to use that would cause the same shock in others that I felt when reading her words, and the feelings I evoked seemed to be similar to the ones I felt. I asked that the article be removed as the headline was changed, which changed the shock value of the piece. Instead, I will attempt to explain my feelings without the easy attention afforded by shock and controversy. At the end of the article in the Phoenix, Ragsdale says that the ones responsible for creating an environment where violence was inevitable were the ones who said Tiller ran an abortion mill. Yet I do not think she is behaving any better by advocating abortion as an absolution. She seems to equate abortion with cosmetic surgery. Her feeling is that a zygote is no more a person than a pimple, and removing it is no big deal. It is not a baby, only the promise of one. Her attitude of abortion as "an unfettered good," to be celebrated (as conveyed by the article's author) is creating the same divisive, controversial environment as those she criticizes. How is this type of speaking going to bring anyone together? Controversy is a cheap way of getting attention, and it usually only leads to more. Her mindset is dangerous as it can easily justify irresponsible sexual behavior rather than careful steps taken to avoid pregnancy. Why use a condom when you can get an abortion? Why not use the morning after pill after every sexual encounter? Perhaps this is the future that we are looking at. But what does this lead to? Already advancements in drugs and technology have led people to the mindset that internal weaknesses can be fixed externally, rather than looking inward at prevention. Why eat right when you can get gastric bypass surgery? Why exercise when you can use a scooter to get around? What may seem like straw men arguments are actually employed as solutions in many cases. I agree with abortion when it involves a danger to the mother and in cases of rape. It should be a last-case method, employed only if there are no other options, not when it becomes an easy way out for people who want to avoid the consequences of their actions. It should be a rarity, never for convenience. Yet, I believe there should be no laws against it, only more education focused on choosing life. The Pro Choice and Pro Life dichotomy should be replaced with a Choose Life movement. Someone of Ragsdale's stature, who will soon be dean to a crop of new Episcopalian divinity students, should be more positive and inclusive than divisive and controversial, and should bring people together rather than push them further apart. The opinions expressed by the writer are the opinions of the writer and their interpretation of shitheadery. If you have an opinion about their opinion, leave a comment or submit an article.
Spread the Shitheadery
Email this
Comments (1)
|
Katherine Ragsdale is an Episcopalian minister who next month will become president and dean of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge. In 2007, she gave a speech in Birmingham, Alabama, after anti-abortion protesters unsuccessfully attempted to shut down a clinic. 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/hide comments
 |
... Thanks for the re-do of your article, your argument is now heard and understood. Your opinion is compelling, especially in the light of moving toward togetherness rather than divisiveness. I am all for it, and always think good open dialogue will get us there. However, I think that the Reverend's point, as provocative as it is, has to do more with encouraging our society in general to SHIFT PERSPECTIVE into seeing abortion as only a woman's choice, not your choice, not my choice, not society's choice, no matter what caused the pregnancy. Abortion IS a blessing. Imagine how many more women would be severely damaged or dead because they tried to abort the fetus in a back alley with a coat hanger? Or, imagine how much more overpopulated our country would be with so many mouths to feed - oh yeah, they wouldn't be fed, because they would be UNWANTED and stuck in an orphanage, with parents that don't want them, or out on the streets. Those kids are already out there, they have been for years, and they are ready to be adopted, loved, fed, etc., but I have yet to hear stories from any pro-life people that they are doing anything to help these kids out or take them in. THAT should be the priority and focus! THAT'S what I want to read in the news! I applaud the Reverend in recognizing women as: (1) valuable human beings; (2) having brains they can think with; and (3) having a human right to choose what to do with their own bodies. What a frackin' concept. By having abortion continue to be legal and safe, women can continue to make their own choices. Similar to other issues in our society, no one should be forced to do anything that he/she doesn't want to do, especially if it's going to have serious consequences. Would I have an abortion? Not necessarily, but for me it honestly would depend on the circumstances. And no, I don't agree with abortion as a quick-easy birth control method, but part of that is on the heads of the medical community, the parents, the teachers, the adults who are out there giving healthy sex education to the kids (that's another issue I won't get into here: healthy sex education - how would that change things? Hmmmmm....). I cannot help but wonder how much of an issue this would be if it were MEN who had the option to abort!?!? If you're interested in dialogue about the issue, there was quite the successful dialogue facilitated by Public Conversations Project (www.publicconversations.org). Women from opposing sides came together and actually talked openly without cutting each other down. I believe Obama's goals around the abortion issue are good, and we will get there, but we all have to jump in together. |
Write comment
Show/hide comment form
If you have an opinion about their opinion, leave a comment or submit an article.
follow face feed
Pissed off and want to rant?
Click the button.
