(no subject)

[adderslj]

When did western culture become so moronic? Why has debate reached the point where the only option seems to be "pick a side and defend its values until the death"?

Take abortion. Abortion is one of the terrible, hard decisions we as a society have to face regularly.

The facts are these: there will always be unwanted pregnancies and women will always seek to end them in some fashion. However, doing so ends the existence of something that will, without intervention, become a human being.

This is actually simple to grasp, yet the debate is dominated by two groups, one of which is unwilling to deal with the reality of backstreet abortions and the human cost of unwanted children, while the other is unwilling to countenance for a second that an abortion might be taking the life of a human being (or that there might be serious emotional consequences for the mother further down the line).

So there we have it, one of the most serious ethical dilemmas our society has to face, and it's reduced to a shouting match between two groups of morons. There are people who are pro-life and people who are pro-choice, but precious few who are pro-thought.

Really, I hope there are better sentient species than us out there somewhere, because we're not using this gift of intelligence terribly well right now.

Comments

[jfs.livejournal.com]

Having watched the various Channel 4 programmes on Sunday about the "top 20 most banned complaints about programs that haven't yet aired Ever!" (something like that, anyhow) and then reading your post, the thought that strikes me is that what you're missing is the silent majority.

Yes - almost any situation can be polarised. For each pole, there will be loud displays of preening and caterwauling with little to no intellectual content.

But people in general respond in bell-curves; the screaming pro-lifers who threaten the lives of doctors and nurses are not representative of society of large; they're not even representative of the Pro-Life movement.

(My dad was involved with Life for a very long time - including helping to run a shelter for teenagers who'd been thrown out of home because they wanted to keep their child rather than having it aborted. He detested the fundamentalist Pro-Lifers because they didn't help at all when he was trying to explain that abortion wasn't the only option.)

The same is just as true of the Pro-Choice people. The ones you see most of are the ones who are most visible.

In the same way that it doesn't take much organisation to get a record into the charts, it doesn't take much to get a 'spokesperson' onto the news for whatever issue is currently in the headlines. And, lets be honest, there will always be some channel of the media that will court controversy by allowing a nut-job (of any / all persuasions) access to a camera.

[adders.livejournal.com]

You're almost certainly right, but it depresses me that the silent majority are, well, silent. When the reasonable, thoughtful people leave the debate to the noisy morons, it cheapens society.

And in this case, the triggering factor wasn't mainstream media, but discussion on the internet, by people who I'd normally consider to be thoughtful. Yes, I know I shouldn't be surprised by this, but just once in a while it does really upset me.