Pro-Life?

Let me start by saying that I profoundly respect pro-life advocates. In the contentious issue of abortion, it is easy to get caught up in the whirlwind of passions and it is not my intention to incite more animosity. Nor is it my intention to persuade those who believe abortion is wrong to abandon their convictions.

I want to talk about abortion because I think this issue is a very good indicator of a general trend in American politics today. The trend I refer to is two-fold: on one hand, legal institutions are being consistently undermined by a concerted effort to shape government policy according to a dubious set of religious values. On the other hand, some conservative politicians take morality hostage by advocating policies plagued with double standards.

Allow me to tackle the latter part of the trend first. I do not think that anyone would argue with me if I say that respect for life is the core principle of the pro-life movement. In the view of pro-life advocates, abortion is objectionable on ethical grounds because it constitutes a deplorable act: taking life away from a human being who cannot defend itself.

Now, I do not think you would disagree with me if I say that there is a religious component to this moral assessment. I am not saying that only religious people oppose the practice of abortion -- polls show that only 50 percent of pro-lifers base their position on religious grounds. But religious affiliation does play a role in an individual's stance on the issue. Sixty-three percent of evangelical Protestants or born-again Christians oppose abortion, while only 33 percent of non-evangelical Protestants coincide. Furthermore, the Catholic Church, whose followers account for 22 percent of the US population, vocally condemns abortion. Consequently, it is fair to say that there is a sizeable block of conservative Christians of different denominations who animate and support the pro-life movement.

The pro-life movement also has important political allies in Congress and in the White House. Republicans take up the fight against abortion in the political arena, but unlike the pro-life constituency they represent, their commitment to respect the sanctity of human life is suspicious. Conservative politicians, including President Bush, do not hesitate to invoke morality in their arguments against abortion.

During the Republican National Convention, George W. Bush said that he "would lead our nation towards a culture that values life." I do not know whether Bush's stance on abortion is motivated by his deep religious convictions -- he is a born again Christian -- or because he wants to keep his electoral base happy. But the fact is that he waves the pro-life banner, invoking an unequivocal respect for life.

Yet, Bush's respect for life is more than questionable. On the one hand, Bush declares himself a pro-life advocate, a committed born again Christian in tune with the values of his religion. On the other, Bush and many of his Republican colleagues show a discouraging disregard to human life in many other cases. Take for example the issue of death penalty. When Bush served as governor, Texas executed more inmates than any other state in the US. Far from expressing any concern for the killing of a fully-grown human being, Bush unabashedly supported the Texas death machine and dutifully signed the numerous execution orders that reached his desk. If you ask me, that is hardly an effective way to "lead our nation towards a culture that values life."

Bush and his associates showed little regard towards human life when they ordered the relentless bombing campaigns against Afghanistan and Iraq. Thousands of innocent civilians have died over the course of the past two years, but I do not think Bush is losing too much sleep over that. The fact that he was willing to sacrifice American as well as Iraqi lives for entirely ludicrous and unacceptable reasons should tell you something about the real value he places on human life.

If his policies do not reveal a clear inconsistency in his alleged respect for life, I do not know what does. You cannot be pro-life and pro-death at the same time. That is neither Christian nor ethical. If you want to protect the sanctity of human life, by all means do so, but at least be consistent.

Of course, some of you might think I am crazy for bringing up this point. After all, you can rightfully contend that there is no room for morality or religious values in the realm of realpolitik. And I would totally agree with you!

There are some necessary wars, and presidents must be ready to kill people. And that is precisely why religion and politics should not be mixed! Morality is not something a president should decide for us. A president has to do his or her job by following the law, irrespective of his moral convictions. What is true for war must be true for abortion.

This brings me to the second part of my argument. The other side of this troubling trend in American politics is the persistent effort to undermine legal institutions in order to advance a religious agenda. We are now seeing how the landmark case of Roe v. Wade is being attacked by conservatives. A new law criminalizing a form of abortion is only the first step in a concerted action to erode the right to choose upheld by the highest court in the land! And how about the decision by the Florida State legislature and Governor Jeb Bush to ignore judicial precedents and force Terri Schiavo to live in a vegetative state? A narrow-minded morality hijacked the legal processes and denied Terri Schiavo of the right to die with dignity.

Nobody is asking pro-life women to abort; that would be a gross interference. By the same token, a person who does not share the same beliefs as pro-life advocates should not be forced to abide by their principles. There is nothing more ethical than to respect the values and morals of other people.

Questions of morality and value systems will always produce friction among individuals, but there is no reason why the government should be held hostage in this battle. It is not the place of the government to impose morals or value judgments on people. In its ideal state, the government acts as an impartial arbitrator, but if the current trends are not reversed, the government will be nothing but an agent of religious interest groups.

Rodrigo de Haro is a senior majoring in International Relations. He can be reached via e-mail at deharo@tuftsdaily.com.