It seems to me that most of the recent osicussidn on abortion has not focused on competing rights-claims, but on the situations in which people have abortions, and what follows. Here's a sampling from just this past week:Also in Time: From my (sparse) reading, these articles don't seem atypical. Just see what pops up when you google abortion middle ground. So while I'm used to the rhetoric of rights that I heard growing up, and used to the framing of the debate as it happens in ethics classes, it seems that most of the current media osicussidn I see is exactly what you're surprised by. There seems to be two reasons for this:1) Political: Pro-life advocates have focused their attentions on state elections and judiciaries, and work on piece-meal legislation rather than straight out overturning of Roe v Wade. Pro-choice supporters have adapted to this strategy and emphasize keeping abortions safe, legal, and rare. Perhaps also evangelicals are becoming less dogmatic (on the surface, at least), more politically savvy, and more aware of the complexities of the issue, but I'm not sure about that.2) People dealing with abortion as a political and personal issue have always been interested in the way that abortion ties into other issues: gender roles, family vs. career decisions, poverty, and so on. Many people for a long time (not just abortion supporters, but perhaps them moreso) have been aware of the interrelatedness of these and other issues. (One example is portrayed in the film *Vera Drake*.) Perhaps now it's just getting more media attention, but I'm in no position to judge that.So while I've heard the people unhelpfully yelling at each other about right to life vs. right to choose, smart people on both sides of the debate have always investigated further to see where and how abortions actually occur and their reasons and effects. Let's hope that continues, and not just on this issue.

0 2012 reply

0 0