Feeling Thinky.

[ihrketayhl]

For the curious, I love my new job. But that's not what this post is about.

Any of you who know me IRL, and a handful of those who only know me online, know that I spend a lot of my time in...let's be generous and call them "conversations"...with those who hold viewpoints that oppose mine.

Put bluntly: I like to argue. A lot.

And for the past handful of years I've felt drawn particularly to religious or religion-based arguments, possibly just because of the sociopolitical climate, or possibly because I like my debates with a healthy dose of batshit. Who knows.*

I'm Catholic, if anyone's wondering; I'm just a pro-gay marriage, pro-evolution, pro-Choice and pro-religious-freedom Catholic who doesn't believe in Hell, which according to a lot of people makes me a very BAD Catholic. XD

Anyway, there's your background. Today's topic is abortion, specifically late-term abortions. No, I'm not planning on making this a terribly long post, I just...needed to vent this at somebody.

I keep hearing from the Pro-Life segment that one of the reasons abortion, especially late-term abortion, is wrong is because God has a purpose for suffering. Today I heard an example of a man whose wife had lung cancer: he claimed it served the purpose of bringing them closer. Now, I know nothing about this man, barring what he says in these comments.

But I'm REALLY BOTHERED by the notion that just because some good comes out of the pain, it somehow JUSTIFIES the pain.

When I was a kid, that was called "looking on the bright side." Which I appreciate! I think it shows great strength of character to take a painful, horrible event, and bring something good out of it. I think people who can do that are the strongest in the world.

That said, the painful, horrible event? Still sucked. Saying that something good came out of it does not transform the event itself into a good thing.

So, to bring it back to the original topic, just because one might grow personally from the experience of watching their malformed child live a short, painful life, doesn't mean that the short, painful life of the child was a wonderful thing. (This is ignoring, even, the idea that painful things happening to others only happen to help YOU grow, an idea which kind of disgusts me.)

Sure, there are bright sides to everything. But deliberately seeking a painful experience--for yourself and for this child? Because God has a purpose for everything and you might grow from it?

I'm not sure what you call that.

(Though, after typing that out, it does occur to me that this is kind of a common theme in the Christian faith. We celebrate Christ's death on the cross. Some of us even celebrate the existence of Hell because the possibility of Hell allows us to appreciate God's love.** Perhaps we need to examine where this comes from before we can really get to the root of the issue.)

*not meant to imply all religious folks are batshit. though i'm religious and i'm pretty batshit, so make of that what you will. XD

**edit to the last *: yeah, never mind, we're batshit.

Interested in other points of view. Sharing welcome.

Comments

[paradoxymoron.livejournal.com]

It is selfish. And self-serving, but sometimes something wonderful does come out of being selfish. There's a difference between causing intentional pain (Munchausen's By Proxy) versus pain due to absense of action (not performing medical work, not treating due to beliefs, etc); are either of those using the child?

One of my friends was not expected to live until her first birthday, much less graduate college and get married (which she's done), because of the extent of the congenital defects she suffered. It's possible she could have been medically aborted, had her parents believed in it (Catholic) or had it been presented (I've never asked).
So. This could have been a case of selfish It's My Baby It Will Be Wonderful during a short, painful life and an early death, but with the Miracle Of Modern Science, she's pulled through. Now, her life is fairly wonderful. Then? Not so much. But? The pain was not unessesary; in order to repair, pain was caused. Pain is still caused on a daily basis due to the nature of the work, but I wouldn't venture that it was unnessesary.

Not asskissing. :D

[vareth-is.livejournal.com]

This is very true! And this is, I think, where a lot of the (SANE, VALID) arguments stem from. You really can't know what the "right" choice will be, because you can't predict a miracle. And because the child has no voice of its own, you have to be the one to decide--are you going to risk the child having a lot of pain and potentially dying very young, or not?

I don't think either choice is inherently selfish, nor do I think pain is something that should ALWAYS be avoided, because sometimes you do need to go through it to grow, to live.

But that's the thing: it's not absolute, and neither option is necessarily more "right," if such a thing can even be quantified. Sometimes aborting the child is the most humane thing you can do, for both the mother and the child; and sometimes, even if you know it's humane, you just can't bring yourself to do it. No one knows how it could turn out or how it will turn out.

That's why they call it pro-choice, not pro-abortion. :)

(And I didn't think you were. You don't strike me as the type to asskiss. XD)

[paradoxymoron.livejournal.com]

There are values, on a scale, of what is and is not right. Sticking a needle into a kid is generally not a good thing. Sticking a needle into a kid to inject a vaccine is a good thing. Sticking a needle into a kid to test an experimental treatment that may cure the overlaying problem but cause further complications...is...getting into the gray fuzzy area in the middle somewhere.

Some people have a definite black/white sense of right and wrong, ethics and morals. Killing a kid is always wrong, no matter if it's to save the life of the mother or to end suffering for a condition that will not improve but will only be prolonged. Other people...there's gray, there's different shades of gray, there's a different spectrum of gray.


I'm gray. :) And I can defend someone making a choice even if I do not agree with that choice (most of the time).

[vareth-is.livejournal.com]

Well, see, I'm not arguing that killing the kid is ever RIGHT.

I'm just saying that--well, that blog I linked to kinda put it best. Sometimes there isn't a right choice. Sometimes there's just a choice.

I grew up in a pro-life household, spent the majority of my life believing in the pro-life movement. The majority of my extended family is pro-life (and there are a lot of them, and I see them often). I definitely understand where that side of the fence is coming from. I've been there.

But I'm not there anymore, for damn good reasons.

[paradoxymoron.livejournal.com]

So you're either on the fence or over on the other side; I take it this is a thought-out move, questioning that side of the equasion and then making your own decision based on your belief structure (rather than absolute rejection/rebellion)?