Abortion, in Pollitt’s view, must be seen not as a moral compromise requested by poor, weak women—we’re sorry, and we promise we’ll make it rare, but please, forgive us, we’ll still need it in extremis— but as a positive doctrine of women’s control over their own bodies, and of their own lives and destinies. Abortion, she insists, is a right integral to women’s own autonomy, not a privilege to be used as infrequently as possible. The Clintons’ shrewd formula—“Safe, legal, and rare”—may have been born of political necessity, but it misstates the truth. Abortion need not promise to be rare to be secured as safe and legal. One of the greatest moral achievements of human history—the full emancipation of women—should not be seconded to a metaphysical intuition, one with no scientific support or even coherent meaning: that a fertilized egg makes the same moral claims as an entire person.
Arguing Abortion - The New Yorker
Source: newyorker.com
9 Notes/ Hide
deathorthetoypiano reblogged this from aeide-thea
deathorthetoypiano liked this
redheadbouquet liked this
aeide-thea reblogged this from feministlibrarian
youarecominggoing liked this
aeide-thea liked this
motivatedslacker liked this
feministlibrarian posted this