Working toward common ground in the abortion debate
May 27, 2009 10:22:00
by Sarah Stoesz
President
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund
A recent Gallup Poll appears to show a shift in public opinion on abortion, with more Americans than ever identifying as “pro-life.” But experience shows that such labels as “pro-life” and “pro-choice” are hopelessly dated and serve to drive wedges between us, and that the poll itself might be asking the wrong questions altogether.
Read deeper into the results of this and other recent polls and you will find that, no matter what the label, most Americans want to keep abortion legal.
We know from our work in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota, that the more we engage in substantive discussion about the issues that affect the health and safety of women, the more people understand and honor the complexity of the abortion issue and recognize the need to leave these personal decisions to women and families.
The truth is that many people have some level of moral ambivalence about abortion. Most South Dakotans, for example, self-identify as "pro-life" and are opposed to abortion, but they have defeated statewide measures to ban abortion in two elections. Even the most conservative Americans want to keep abortion safe, legal and rare. Why? Because abortion is a morally complicated issue, which is precisely why woman are entitled to think it through and come to their own conclusions.
It’s high time that the rest of the country follow South Dakota's lead and stop using the divisive language of the past and start acknowledging and respecting the internal conflict felt by many voters on this issue. Acknowledging moral conflict is not something to fear, but rather, a measure of respect for an individual's capacity to make the best decision for themselves and their families, rather than being left at the whim of government decision makers.
South Dakota voters didn’t reject abortion bans because they are suddenly “pro-choice.” Rather, they said “no” because they understood the consequences of banning abortion and did not want government intruding on personal family decisions.
The key to expanding the conversation and creating the common ground that President Obama so eloquently called for in his address at Notre Dame is to acknowledge differing views and concerns about abortion while also reinforcing the idea that abortion is a personal matter in which government and others should not interfere.
President Obama’s speech mirrored the sentiments of most Americans and underscored the importance of the work Planned Parenthood does every day to provide family planning services and reduce unintended pregnancy.
Roe v. Wade has been settled law for decades. Those who try to rekindle that debate with heated rhetoric are taking the focus off the common goals most of us share of reducing unintended consequences and the need for abortion.
These are goals we can all agree on. Let's move beyond labels and toward meeting these goals.
Trackback: http://www.plannedparenthoodadvocate.org/trackback/608/xnYXQ05p/
