Not all about choice

In the run-up to the 2006 mid-term elections, when optimism and idealism still hadn’t been driven out of me, a few friends and I drove to South Dakota to campaign against a proposed abortion ban. When we gathered in a room awaiting voter lists, I was struck by how homogeneous our group was – primarily middle-aged white women. The anti-choice groups I had seen protesting, on the other hand, were composed of young women and men.

Such a discrepancy in the age and sex of reproductive rights activists has been explored in national polls. A 2003 CBS/New York Times poll, for example, found that 35 percent of young women thought that abortion should be legal, compared to 50 percent of young women in 1993. A more recent poll by the New York Times and CBS News found that 50 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds supported stricter restrictions on abortion.

How did it get here? Some feminists will argue that complacency about Roe v. Wade is largely a function of the notion that reproductive rights are here to stay. Considering that we have a pro-choice president as well a Democratic Congress, few fear the assault on women’s rights that was the hallmark of the Bush administration.

Could it be, however, that young people’s reluctance to wholeheartedly embrace reproductive rights is largely liberals’ doing?

Part of the problem here is the terminology of “choice.” When contrasted with “life,” choice implies an amoral and consumerist way of looking at things, an idea first propounded by linguist Deborah Tannen. The concept of choice also strikes me as rather selfish in that it only considers the rights of women.

For example, there are some liberals who believe that health care providers should be forced to perform abortions, however morally repugnant they may find the practice. These individuals claim that a woman’s “choice” to have an abortion must override moral and religious considerations. One can see how problematic this claim is, given that we make all sorts of accommodations in the workplace. Health care providers shouldn’t be treated any differently. This is not to say that a woman’s ability to have an abortion must be overridden by political or religious factors. However, there needs to be a middle ground in the abortion fight, and liberals must focus less on rights as a framework and more on ending unwanted pregnancies.

Ultimately, the fight to rearticulate reproductive justice will rest with us liberals. After all, conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Jerome Corsi are far too busy promoting hateful rhetoric and referring to us as “baby killers.” Indeed, for a group that cares a great deal about the sanctity of life, anti-choicers have repeatedly opposed comprehensive sex education and other measures to decrease abortions.

Perhaps I’ve been swept up by all the talk of unity that seems to have surrounded us, but I’m tired of pro-choicers, particularly women, alienating well-meaning people from our dialogue. We might disagree on the specifics, but we can support the notion of a society that abhors unwanted pregnancies. This is not just our fight alone, and it never should be.