I listened to Rudy Giuliani explain his public policy position on abortion. Essentially, he's against abortion personally, but thinks it's a Constitutional liberty the government must protect. If I understand him correctly, he is personally against abortion because of his religion but believes he can't take that into public policy. I agree with him, and that's why when it comes to abortion, a religious view isn't enough.
Many people are probably pro-life because of their religious instruction. That's iimportant personally to guide their our consciences. But abortion is also a public policy issue that we, as good citizens, should be prepared to explain and defend on common grounds. It isn't enough that pro-lifers hold their view for religious reasons. It isn't enough that Rudy Giuliani, or any politician, is personally pro-life.
Abortion is wrong because it takes the life of an innocent human being. That's why religion teaches it's wrong. Now when we make the move to public policy, how does that translate? It's not a mere matter of faith that the unborn is a human life; it's a medial fact. It's already a significant legal principle that the government should protect the innocent from injustice, especially taking their lives. Unborn children, then, deserve the same protection any other human being is guaranteed. That's the public policy issue.
It's not enough to be personally pro-life. It's not enough to have a religious position. If the unborn are human beings then they, too, should be protected under the law. If someone believes this religiously, then it should not be that hard to make the public policy step. Unborn human life isn't a matter of faith; it's a matter of fact. If someone is personally pro-life but public pro-choice, then I'm afraid they haven't grasped this core principle of being pro-life.
No comments:
Post a Comment