‘The teachings of abortion’ and the unbearable tediousness of pro-choice literature

Remember when I mentioned the pro-abortion movement’s silly habit of being unbearably elitist? They aren’t exactly kicking the habit. This I maintain, that while it may be mere stupidity to ignore obvious facts, the height of snobbishness would be to create ‘facts’ of one’s own; to make oneself a tiny, awkward god of an alternative reality.

This was struck home to me by Linda Weber, co-founder of Boulder clinic, who has written a book “Life Choices: The Teachings of Abortion”. Whether facts and figures are mentioned at all in the book is doubtful. From what was released it seems that Weber has simply authored an manifesto of snobbery, in which abortion is redefined in such a way to make it ‘positive’. Under her justifying hands an alternative universe flowers.

For instance, Weber recalls a client who compared her abortion with cutting a leaf off a plant to make the whole plant stronger. She writes: “It was such an important idea. She had an equilibrium in her decision and a perception of her experience that was unusual and valuable to know about.”

Now hold up. Ignoring the fact that by “making the whole plant stronger” Weber is probably not referring to increasing a woman’s risk of breast cancer, there is a deeper issue. Weber is working with metaphors. Poetry is a beautiful thing, but this book is specifically written for women who have had abortions. Hear then, one of the various balms offered to these women. Imagine yourselves as plants, and it’ll be okay. But a woman is not a plant, and human fetuses are not leaves.

Need I point out that if in order to justify an action you must create an unreality of woman-as-agent-without-moral-capacity and fetus-as-regrowing-organ-of-said-agent, you’re probably going to get mocked by the Age of the Ultrasound?

It gets so much worse: “I feel like separating out the developing pregnancy and the fetus from the woman is demeaning for women.”

Modern embryology makes it rather clear that a developing fetus, while dependent on his mother, is separate from her as a distinct human life. But — in a striking show of oh-I’m-beyond-all-that-science-stuff — Weber just feels otherwise. I’m sure we’re all aware of it, that warm, fuzzy, fetuses-aren’t-distinct-lives feeling. But seriously, this is what we are subjected to! Neither facts, nor data, nor philosophy nor science, but metaphors, vagueness and emotion. A simply wrong-headed person would tell us that abortion is morally fine. A snob tells about his ‘feelings’ and expects them to be taken into account.

And so it goes, spinning and weaving a universe which the pro-abortion movement can dwell comfortably in, never having to peek out into reality. Instead of discussing the only question that matters – whether  the fetus is a human person – Weber is content to speak on abortion by not speaking on abortion at all: “It’s just another experience. Life is full of them. I don’t believe in categorizing an experience as good or bad. It might feel good or bad, but it’s not good or bad in terms of morality.”

But wait, Weber dearest, I thought abortion was positive! Now it’s neither good nor bad? But what is positive but another word for good? And if it is just another experience, wherefore the book? And do you realize that the wisdom of your lines amounts to saying: Abortion is something that happens to you. Other things happen to you! I, personally, don’t believe that things that happen to you are good or bad. Therefore, abortion is positive!

Brilliant! We stand stunned.

One would think that the ignorant, religious, pro-life fools would be the individuals guilty of spiritualizing matters of science into incomprehensibility. As it turns out, it is the pro-life movement that asks the only question that matters, and pro-abortion movement that spends its time orbiting the issue in an ether of subjective fluff, desperately trying to make some money off books that don’t say anything at all.

The really laughable part of the whole embarrassing situation is the general assumption that Weber’s book is controversial. Oh, would the pro-abortion movement dare to be controversial. No, such a book is the death of controversy, for it is boring. It is another banal addition to the trough of pro-abortion literature; It is no more than a tedious monologue on beliefs, feelings and opinions, written to a world increasingly concerned with reality, facts and truth. We live under the tyranny of snobbery, and we are rebelling.