Abortion does not have a middle ground
Fionola Meridith (Belfast Telegraph, February 15) states “When you leave the shrieking pro-lifers out of [the abortion debate], it is clear that this is not a polarised issue.”
I wonder has Ms Meredith really thought about what she is saying. There is no issue more polarising, or polarised than abortion. The rights and wrongs of ending a life, for that is what it is, is by its very necessity polarising.
In recent years people have tried to airbrush this polarised debate. The language of the debate has been deliberately softened. The language may have softened, but the issue remains the same and it is a polarising issue.
On the one side the pro-abortion lobby claim that the issue which is at stake is the woman’s right to choose. They will dress up their argument, as Ms Meredith does, with the notion that they would never choose abortion themselves or that slight tweaks must be made to the law. However, at its core, the pro-abortion lobby’s argument is one that upholds a woman’s right to choose. So what is the middle ground between this position and the pro-life position?
For common ground to be found, pro-life advocates would need to accept that sometimes, in some circumstances, an abortion is necessary. Alternatively, for the pro-abortion lobby to compromise, they would need to accept that sometimes a woman does not have the right to choose, that sometimes the rights of an unborn child trump the rights of the mother. There simply is no middle ground in this debate. Abortion is a monumental clash of competing absolutes. The conflict stands between the desire to value every human life and the need to give every human being choice.
The real agenda of Ms Meredith is an attempt to make the abortion debate normal. The pro-abortion lobby wants us to start to talk about abortion as if it was any other surgical procedure.
To email your letter to the Editor click here