BACK TO VIEWS

Views

Thinking about the Unthinkable
By Paul Simmons, Ph.D., Th.M.
April 20, 2006

Dr. Simmons is Clinical Professor, Department of Family and Geriatric Medicine, University of Louisville School of Medicine, and Adjunct Professor in the Department of Philosophy, University of Louisville. He is an ordained Baptist minister and has been pastor of churches in Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee. He was professor of Christian Ethics at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary from 1970-1993. Dr. Simmons is a regular contributor to Voice for Choice, the newsletter of the Kentucky Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, from which this is reprinted, with his permission.

In the tense days of the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States, the prospect of nuclear war was a source of anxiety and stress. The official policy of both superpowers was called MAD (mutually assured destruction). The horrors of war were thought so terrible that only the deranged would advocate using a nuclear weapon. Herman Kahn, a physicist with MIT, dared to question that assumption in a little book called "Thinking About the Unthinkable." His argument was that we had better take seriously the prospect of war, not be lulled into apathy by thinking it would never happen.

Kahn's warning seems on target for the abortion debate. The forces determined to ban abortion are gleeful with the prospect of overturning Roe v. Wade with the recent appointment of two conservative judges to the Supreme Court. Pat Robertson, the bobble-head of the religious right, is smiling all over himself as are numerous leaders in the National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

South Dakota wants to lead the way, with Kentucky, Indiana, Missouri and Ohio cheering and backing them up. South Dakota legislators have passed a bill that virtually bans abortion. The only exception would be if the woman's life is in danger. They believe this will force the Supreme Court to re-consider Roe.

Two things have led up to this deplorable state of affairs: (1) the persistent, unrelenting belligerence of anti-choice forces; and (2) widespread apathy on the part of pro-choice people. The anti-choice group is non-negotiable and dogmatic. For them abortion is the moral equivalent of killing a person. Pro-choice people are gentler in their judgments, believing abortion should be legal and that the woman is the proper one to decide whether to be or remain pregnant. Contraception is also (unthinkably) part of the debate. Emergency contraception is now also on the agenda for the ban.

A terrible irony exists among Americans. Many in the pro-choice majority have taken the legal availability of abortion for granted and believed that it would remain protected by a sympathetic Supreme Court. They have thus not insisted on their rights at the legislative and executive levels. The anti-choice crowd has voted a one-issue ticket--abortion is their one reason for voting at all. Radical anti-choice people have thus been added to the ranks of legislators and judges. They pledge to uphold the Constitution while attacking the Bill of Rights and other Constitutional guarantees.

The anti-choice group, meanwhile, has assumed they would never need an abortion. They see themselves as so pious and moral that they would never think of terminating a pregnancy. Doing so would be simply UNTHINKABLE.

Such a lack of insight and realism is shocking. Women have a one in five chance of being raped during their lifetime and genetic deformities in children have doubled in the past twenty years, thus becoming a major public health concern.

A pastor's wife who had always thought she "would never" consider abortion was raped and impregnated. The moral quandary led her to Louisville where she talked with a Christian counselor about the morality of terminating a rapist pregnancy.

A woman active in the anti-choice ranks had an ultrasound during pregnancy and discovered her fetus was lethally afflicted. She decided to terminate the pregnancy as an act of love. Better to terminate at four months that to have a child die with an incurable illness over a two year period.

In both cases, should the anti-choice forces succeed, such options would be lost.

Neither woman wanted to have an abortion but faced a terrible situation in which a tragic choice had to be made. These are moral and religious women who would only think of abortion under extreme circumstances.

The problem is that so many women are unwilling to Think about the Unthinkable. To be indifferent toward the threats from the religious right or to actively participate in the effort to deprive women of reproductive choice is to disenfranchise all women. The future is foreclosed in the event of bad things happening to us. And bad things do happen to good people, as Rabbi Kushner reminds us.

Sadly, many good, pro-choice women have never written a letter, nor called a legislator, nor made a donation to protect choice. Their indifference and apathy is joined to a quiet hope that someone else will protect such rights for them

Apathy feeds the determination of people who want an America that is oppressive towards women. They see niceness as weakness, and take every advantage of opportunities to increase their power over others.

The anti-choice forces would not even allow abortion in the case of burdensome or threatening pregnancies. The woman would lose all choice in the matter and her life would be jeopardized in favor of protecting a fetus, many of whom would die anyway.

"Thinking about the Unthinkable" means coming to terms with the legal and social situation one would prefer in the event bad things happen in one's own life. Believing it is always someone else, or that only the immoral, careless or irresponsible ever resort to the termination of a pregnancy, simply flies in the face of reality.

A realistic and moral assessment of the threats to women's well-being and justice concerns requires an aggressive effort to preserve legal options regarding abortion. We should work to protect liberties even if we think we would never need to use them. After all, if not I, then my daughter, wife or mother or my grandchild and her children may face unforeseen difficulties. No woman should be deprived of liberties that should rightly surround God-given responsibilities pertaining to reproductive choice.

Madison warned his contemporizes that liberty was a fragile possession. He and others had succeeded in fashioning a Constitution and Bill of Rights that would emphasize liberties and responsibilities. They considered it unthinkable that Puritans or priests would be allowed to control the thoughts and actions of citizens in the United States. They carefully crafted safeguards that would protect individuals from the powers of legislators or religionists who wanted power over the mind and conscience of others. Individual liberties are now under assault. Our children and theirs may live in a very different country than that envisioned by Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and others. We have had the privilege of growing up in the land of the free; our children and their's may never get a chance to know what that means. It is time we Think and think seriously about the Unthinkable.