Thursday, 15 September 2011

Materialism and abortion

The Guardian is absolutely spot-on in its condemnation of the consumer culture's effects on children. So why does it maintain a ruthlessly market-driven approach to abortion?
At present, the organisations which give supposedly unbiased information to women considering terminations are the very ones which receive money on execution of the deed - and only then. Surely, a vested interest.
Organisations, for example, like that named after the eugenicist Nazi-sympathiser Marie Stopes, who sent love letters to Hitler and disowned her child for marrying someone with poor eyesight. The Guardian practically beatifies her as the patron saint of women's rights, but if they really wanted to follow in her footsteps (or goosesteps), maybe they should just start an AH fan club.

'My body, my choice': you couldn't ask for a more consumerist mantra. And OK, it's excusable when it really is only 'my body' at stake. In that case, there are many reproductive choices already available: you can choose contraception, for a start, or even choose not to have sex with someone you wouldn't have a baby with.
But when it's not just 'my body' but another human life at stake, the consumerist attitude is sickening. Life should not be terminated for the sake of convenience: whether for the sake of a hare lip or a sparkling career. If people want rights, they also have to take responsibility for their actions.
Of course, that goes for men just as much as women. All this stands in favour of that ultimately anti-consumerist institution of marriage, which is surely one of the strongest means of social justice: the unconditional commitment to fidelity is a guarantee of stability to women and children, who suffer far more than adult men from the isolating effects of a society driven by a consumeristic approach to sexuality.
The bottom line of this approach is that unimpeded sexual expression is a fundamental human right, and procreation an unfortunate side-effect.  To the Christian looking at the natural world, such thinking is plain topsy-turvy.
I am not suggesting that we ban abortion, only that it is a necessary evil.  The Christian ideal would be a world where abortion was unnecessary: where rapes did not happen and mistakes were not made.  But this is not the real world, and state-regulated abortion is better than back street rackets.  But if Britain is more than just a nominally Christian country, we must move towards the ideal, and aim to cut the obscene number of abortions carried out in this country seemingly without remorse.
When infants are terminated with a market-driven, utilitarian disregard for the sanctity of life, arguments about the effect of consumerism on children seem rather hollow.

UK children stuck in 'materialistic trap'

1 comment: