Dammit Janet left the progressive bloggers blogroll thing because the folk there decided to reopen the “debate” over abortion.
On the face of it what is wrong with a debate? Everyone loves to talk things through and arrive at a decision that takes into account all the facts, don’t they? In a debate yes, but this isn’t a debate at all. It is a “debate” or rather a backhanded way of telling a segment of society that their rights are dependent on the charity of others, not like the rights of other segments of society.
Me as a white guy, living in the West I have a pretty privileged life and a whole swack of rights, one of which is the right to decide what I do with my body and that others cannot do anything to it without my permission. Those insisting that there is something to “debate”about abortion are saying that women don’t have that right. They are not as entitled to the same rights of citizenship that I am. They are saying that just by proposing that there is even a “debate” on the issue.
Straight away the alarm bells are ringing.
Imagine if in the same fora someone was to say, “yep about that whole equality of the races under the law thing, are you sure that’s a good idea? Shouldn’t we “debate” that some more?” or, “why should people who don’t own land have a vote? They have no material stake in the country. Let’s “debate” on that.”
I think I know how folk would respond to those suggestions and quite rightly too. But I’ve noticed that women’s and homosexual’s rights are very frequently up for “debate,” immigrants and non-whites rights next most frequently and white men’s rights, well … pretty much never.
I wonder why that is? Isn’t it just a “debate” after all? And what’s wrong with “debate?”
h/t TGB for the idea of “debate”