My Secret Burden - The abortion-rights movement grapples with repression. By William Saletan
I have previously referred to "pro-choice" William Saletan's daring suggestion that the pro-choice movement admit that abortion is bad.
His latest article above is about how he was received at a pro-choice debate. ("Not well" is the short answer: "It was like preaching to the choir, except that my preaching was Sunni, and the choir was Shiite.") The whole piece is well worth reading, because it covers many bothersome aspects that the movement shares with the Left generally. For example:
Then I have this hangup about relativism. Like most people, I'm open to relativism. If you accept that the rightness or wrongness of abortion depends to some extent on circumstance, or that as a general rule, the woman in question is more entitled to weigh the moral factors than Rick Santorum is, that makes you a bit of a relativist. But it was clear at Friday's meeting that many pro-choice activists go further. They're absolutists about relativism. They argue that abortion is good because it's what a woman wants, and that the goodness or badness of abortion depends entirely on her choice. They insist all choices must be "respected" and "free from stigma." I don't get it. If everything has to be respected, what's the value of respect? If every exercise of liberty has to be free from stigma, how secure is liberty?
Right away, I got in trouble for calling abortion "bad." I like such words because they're blunt: They express a nearly universal gut reaction and make it clear which direction you'd like to go. The absolute relativists in the room found these words unacceptable, since they "stigmatize" and "pass judgment" on women and doctors.... To my relief, cooler heads pointed out how judgmental the absolute relativists are about gender equality and human rights. Liberals treat judgment the way conservatives treat sex: forbid it, except when you're doing it.