San Antonio College students' network for the 2008 election
Abortion
As I sat down at the small table, the gentle clink of glasses and the rustle of tablecloths mixed with the gentle murmur of conversations that floated through the air, created a relaxing atmosphere that permeated the entire restaurant. I considered my friend thoughtfully as she sat down and began to examine the menu. “You know, I think we should skip the small talk and get right to this,” her muffled voice drifted out from behind the shiny, plastic covered menu. Her bright green eyes suddenly peered at me over the top of the menu. “I believe in getting to the point.” Her voice smiled at me as she continued, “Saves time and is much more interesting.” Smiling, I was again reminded why I had chosen to interview her.
Verity is very serious, calculating, and one of the most intelligent people I know. She has a persona that follows her wherever she goes and makes you excited just to be around her. She is enigmatic, very much a people person and secure in who she is and what she’s about. I knew that her opinion would be a reliable one--something I could not be sure to get from most of my friends. When I had asked her if I could interview her for a paper I was writing, she immediately responded with an enthusiastic, “Yes!” She did put a disclaimer on herself though. She warned me that she had a different take on the election than most. She told me that she did not base her ideas on anything taken from media or other people. I was intrigued, and yet oddly tempted, by the promise of an independently chosen perspective. Here’s how our interview went…
Me: “Well then, let’s get to it! I’m interviewing you about what issue matters the most to you in the upcoming election. After hearing your diatribe on how much thought you put into this entire process, I had to know more. To be honest, I was a little wary when I heard about this assignment. To vote on one issue seems very one-sided to me. It appears as if everyone today is trumpeting either the war or the economy as their deciding factor in the upcoming election. Am I off base in thinking that we should vote on a broader basis than a single issue? I suppose I am getting off topic though, my first question for you is: What issue means the most to you in the upcoming election?”
Verity: "Well, to answer the first subject you brought up, I think when something as big as the economy or the war or even taxes affects as many people as it does currently, the issue becomes a very big concern. We aren’t very bothered by talk in Washington or even a few bills that get passed—we don’t even feel their effects. Yet when our wallets are touched, or our family members are dying in a foreign country, we become very concerned. So, to vote on one issue, whatever is nearest and dearest to your heart, is not a bad thing. Understand, I think mimicking your vote to whatever the media says to do is wrong, but I wouldn’t call one issue voting one-sided. As for your second question, the issue I vote on is abortion. “
Around this time my stomach dropped. This was my great issue? This was what I was going to write about? Was this really relevant to anything? I saw my paper go up in smoke.
Me: “Well, that’s um…not what I was expecting but I suppose it’s always good to see things from a different angle. I would love to hear what you have to say. I suppose my next question is: Why is abortion the deciding factor in your vote?”
Verity: “ I believe it gets to the core of how a candidate feels about the people he will serve. His stance on this issue tells how much value he places on the individual. Does he view us as unique entities, each with something to offer society? Or does he see us as replaceable parts, just another cog in the machine of humanity? If I am replaceable, then I am worth nothing to him insofar as he can get someone else to be a substitute in my place. If I am unique, he is more aware of the implications and severity of his decisions and how they affect me. Instead of just moving faceless pawns around, his choices and decisions now affect real people with real lives.”
Me: “That’s a really good point. Is there anything else that you feel abortion tells you about a candidate? Are there any other reasons that your issue is crucial to your decision?”
Verity: “Of course! I also believe their stance on abortion tells you how they will protect our personal rights. If you would deny life, in its purest and simplest form, existence, you are making a dangerous statement. You are implying that someone only has a right to personal liberties when they are able to “contribute” to society. It is no different than you not being able to speak for yourself and the government allowing someone else to decide whether you lived or died.Can the choice of life or death be given to anyone but the individual? To say yes creates a slippery slope.”
Me: “That is a really interesting thought. Sp far we have talked about how abortion tells how the candidate will serve the individual. I know that some people also base their choice on a general perspective. To look at a world-wide stage, would you still say abortion is a relevant issue to place so much credence on?”
Verity: “Oh yes, I think it is—here’s why. People always say that every woman has a “choice” to keep her baby or dispose of it, as if a living human child were a factor in the equation, a disposable entity. The more I thought about this, I discovered that that idea is morally off base. To exterminate one life, not for another life but for another’s comfort, is wrong. You are making a judgment, deciding that the weaker and less “valuable” (at least by materialistic standards), needs to be eliminated for the benefit of the stronger. Who decides which one is “valuable” or “not worth keeping”? The principle of removing the unfit for the benefit of the fit is one of the values the Nazi regime was founded on.
Elitist ideas have crept into modern reasoning and corrupted the basic value of all human life, not just the ones we deem valuable. There is no value system on people; you cannot decide if one is worth more than the other. Who can judge? So then, to answer your question, you find out what a candidate is willing to sacrifice by looking at his abortion stance, because it reveals his foundational principals. What is he willing to sacrifice for the “betterment” of the whole? Does he mind giving up your life for his vision? “
Me: “So you look at the moral basis of a candidate rather than his propositions?”
Verity: “Definitely. A tree is only as good as its roots. If you look at the basic morals of each candidate, not taking what everyone says is true but really looking into who they are, you will see whom it is you are giving your vote to.You are deciding who you want to represent you and what you believe.”
Me: “You’ve really given me some great ideas to work with, is there anything else you want to add?”
Verity: “I think I said everything I needed to.”
Me: “Thank you so much for taking the time to do this for me, I really appreciate it!”
As our conversation turned to lighter subjects, I silently reflected on what Verity had told me. I saw truth in the line of reasoning she had taken, as well as a well-grounded foundation. I realized that she was right in saying that if your candidate doesn’t believe in the enormous value each individual represents, he will not serve you like you want to be served. If he feels you are just another face in his constituency, why should he particularly care for you or what you want? She was also right when she said that no one should be able to decide if someone else lives or dies. It is not anyone’s place to elevate anyone over another and judge between the two. To assign this position to anyone is faulty, to then further give the decision of life or death is wrong. No one can ever know how a single person can impact the world. As I thought about our interview, I began to realize how much a stance on abortion told about how each candidate would lead. Ideas have consequences and in this case, they determined votes.
Verity is very serious, calculating, and one of the most intelligent people I know. She has a persona that follows her wherever she goes and makes you excited just to be around her. She is enigmatic, very much a people person and secure in who she is and what she’s about. I knew that her opinion would be a reliable one--something I could not be sure to get from most of my friends. When I had asked her if I could interview her for a paper I was writing, she immediately responded with an enthusiastic, “Yes!” She did put a disclaimer on herself though. She warned me that she had a different take on the election than most. She told me that she did not base her ideas on anything taken from media or other people. I was intrigued, and yet oddly tempted, by the promise of an independently chosen perspective. Here’s how our interview went…
Me: “Well then, let’s get to it! I’m interviewing you about what issue matters the most to you in the upcoming election. After hearing your diatribe on how much thought you put into this entire process, I had to know more. To be honest, I was a little wary when I heard about this assignment. To vote on one issue seems very one-sided to me. It appears as if everyone today is trumpeting either the war or the economy as their deciding factor in the upcoming election. Am I off base in thinking that we should vote on a broader basis than a single issue? I suppose I am getting off topic though, my first question for you is: What issue means the most to you in the upcoming election?”
Verity: "Well, to answer the first subject you brought up, I think when something as big as the economy or the war or even taxes affects as many people as it does currently, the issue becomes a very big concern. We aren’t very bothered by talk in Washington or even a few bills that get passed—we don’t even feel their effects. Yet when our wallets are touched, or our family members are dying in a foreign country, we become very concerned. So, to vote on one issue, whatever is nearest and dearest to your heart, is not a bad thing. Understand, I think mimicking your vote to whatever the media says to do is wrong, but I wouldn’t call one issue voting one-sided. As for your second question, the issue I vote on is abortion. “
Around this time my stomach dropped. This was my great issue? This was what I was going to write about? Was this really relevant to anything? I saw my paper go up in smoke.
Me: “Well, that’s um…not what I was expecting but I suppose it’s always good to see things from a different angle. I would love to hear what you have to say. I suppose my next question is: Why is abortion the deciding factor in your vote?”
Verity: “ I believe it gets to the core of how a candidate feels about the people he will serve. His stance on this issue tells how much value he places on the individual. Does he view us as unique entities, each with something to offer society? Or does he see us as replaceable parts, just another cog in the machine of humanity? If I am replaceable, then I am worth nothing to him insofar as he can get someone else to be a substitute in my place. If I am unique, he is more aware of the implications and severity of his decisions and how they affect me. Instead of just moving faceless pawns around, his choices and decisions now affect real people with real lives.”
Me: “That’s a really good point. Is there anything else that you feel abortion tells you about a candidate? Are there any other reasons that your issue is crucial to your decision?”
Verity: “Of course! I also believe their stance on abortion tells you how they will protect our personal rights. If you would deny life, in its purest and simplest form, existence, you are making a dangerous statement. You are implying that someone only has a right to personal liberties when they are able to “contribute” to society. It is no different than you not being able to speak for yourself and the government allowing someone else to decide whether you lived or died.Can the choice of life or death be given to anyone but the individual? To say yes creates a slippery slope.”
Me: “That is a really interesting thought. Sp far we have talked about how abortion tells how the candidate will serve the individual. I know that some people also base their choice on a general perspective. To look at a world-wide stage, would you still say abortion is a relevant issue to place so much credence on?”
Verity: “Oh yes, I think it is—here’s why. People always say that every woman has a “choice” to keep her baby or dispose of it, as if a living human child were a factor in the equation, a disposable entity. The more I thought about this, I discovered that that idea is morally off base. To exterminate one life, not for another life but for another’s comfort, is wrong. You are making a judgment, deciding that the weaker and less “valuable” (at least by materialistic standards), needs to be eliminated for the benefit of the stronger. Who decides which one is “valuable” or “not worth keeping”? The principle of removing the unfit for the benefit of the fit is one of the values the Nazi regime was founded on.
Elitist ideas have crept into modern reasoning and corrupted the basic value of all human life, not just the ones we deem valuable. There is no value system on people; you cannot decide if one is worth more than the other. Who can judge? So then, to answer your question, you find out what a candidate is willing to sacrifice by looking at his abortion stance, because it reveals his foundational principals. What is he willing to sacrifice for the “betterment” of the whole? Does he mind giving up your life for his vision? “
Me: “So you look at the moral basis of a candidate rather than his propositions?”
Verity: “Definitely. A tree is only as good as its roots. If you look at the basic morals of each candidate, not taking what everyone says is true but really looking into who they are, you will see whom it is you are giving your vote to.You are deciding who you want to represent you and what you believe.”
Me: “You’ve really given me some great ideas to work with, is there anything else you want to add?”
Verity: “I think I said everything I needed to.”
Me: “Thank you so much for taking the time to do this for me, I really appreciate it!”
As our conversation turned to lighter subjects, I silently reflected on what Verity had told me. I saw truth in the line of reasoning she had taken, as well as a well-grounded foundation. I realized that she was right in saying that if your candidate doesn’t believe in the enormous value each individual represents, he will not serve you like you want to be served. If he feels you are just another face in his constituency, why should he particularly care for you or what you want? She was also right when she said that no one should be able to decide if someone else lives or dies. It is not anyone’s place to elevate anyone over another and judge between the two. To assign this position to anyone is faulty, to then further give the decision of life or death is wrong. No one can ever know how a single person can impact the world. As I thought about our interview, I began to realize how much a stance on abortion told about how each candidate would lead. Ideas have consequences and in this case, they determined votes.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Diondra on -
Personally, I believe that life begins at conception and am, for the most part, against abortion. However, I recognize that there ARE exceptions and there's more to the issue than "denying life in it's purest and simplest form" as Verity said. What happens when a woman is suddenly stricken with some kind of condition in which continuing her pregnancy would simultaneously mean ending her own life? Do we dig in our heels and say "abortion is wrong" and lose two lives when we could've saved one? What about in the case of rape? Or when a doctor sits down with the parents of an unborn child to tell them that their son or daughter has "x" disease and will be crippled and in enormous pain everyday of their life? Is it of good morals to knowingly let a child be born into a lifetime of physical suffering?
I disagree that a candidate's view on abortion is a reflection of how he/she will govern. And to say his/her viewpoint on the topic tells how much he/she values us as individuals is an overgeneralization. For example, Barack Obama is Pro-Choice, but in his platform he wants to help those who are struggling. Time and time again we hear how he had a choice of going to Wall Street, but he chose to help people in the community. Being Pro-Choice doesn't necessarily mean you condone abortion; it means you believe in giving a woman/parents a choice. Isn't that what democracy is about? Some may argue that in giving the woman/parents a choice, we take away the choice of the unborn. I disagree; it's not like a fetus can choose between life and death anyway. Furthermore, one can reserve to feel a certain way about something and still be tolerant of people who feel differently. So, no , I don't think how a candidate feels about abortion should alone be the deciding factor in whether or not he/she deserves to hold office.
-
Permalink Reply by MelissaB on -
First of all, Alysa, I just wanted to comment that you are an exceptional writer. I throughly enjoyed reading your interview because it flowed so beautifully.
This is a hot button issue for me. I consider myself a left leaning moderate and I have vehemently supported Barack Obama before he even declared his candidacy. On most social issues as well as fiscal, I am a liberal. My husband is a hard core liberal. This is the one issue we decided years ago that we would not discuss any longer, because inevitably it led to a fight. I was raised by very conservative, religious parents to believe that life begins at conception and abortion is wrong. As I get older, I have begun to see both sides, however that simply creates a conundrum in my own mind. I do see the argument that "limiting the right to choose" is, in some opinion, infringing upon personal rights... but I agree that no one ever asked the child if we were infringing on theirs.
I think Verity's theory about the candidates reflecting their beliefs about the individual is logical, although I don't know if I can totally agree with it. I believe Obama has a great heart. I believe he does care about the individual very deeply. I think that is where the moral dillemma arises for all of us- which individual do we protect?
I do disagree with one-issue voting. If Obama and McCain were running for the head of a committee in Congress to review abortion, that would be appropriate. But they are running for President. We each have a responsibility to take all the information available and make an informed decision. While Verity may surmise from Obama's stand on abortion that he does not care for the individual, she would see from other issues that he most certainly does--- his plans for healthcare, the war in Iraq, education, etc.
Again, great essay!
-
Permalink Reply by Elizabeth on
-
I found this interview to be one of the most insightful that I have read in a long time. I applaud your following through with the interview even after you realized it was not what you would have planned for the perfect paper. Your friend provided great insight to what I feel we have steered away from, morals and values. We are so busy looking at the bottom line and money we forget what is really important to us. Its so easy to get distracted by on going concerns that are bigger than one candidate. The media has become such a huge outlet in the opinion of the people. We have to get away from that and remember our voice and what we can do to let our voice be heard. Going back to the foundation- what a great way to help decide who you want to lead this country, although I have to say, for me, there are more factors.
Abortion is such a sensitive issue. I do not agree with abortion. I think there might be circumstances in which we reach grey area (medical, rape, etc) but I would fear that this grey area would be the exception not the norm. Its accountability. As far as aborting a baby that could have something wrong with it... all I can say is that, after joining a pregnancy help group, I have met many women who were told that something was wrong only to have nomal babies. I have also met women who were told everything was okay only to have kinds with something wrong. Should we kill those too? Its a very personal choice and a very sensitive subject and I applaud you for writing about it and your friend for opening up about it.
-
Permalink Reply by lamar hailey on
-
i totally agree with verity!abortion is very important when deciding how a candidate will treat the citizens of the country whether they are pawns or people and it isn't up to the people who are having the kid, they made the choice they need to live with the consequenses otherwise this country will keep going downhill just like it has been for the past thirty years.when people can just do what they want and not worry about paying for it later then there are no morals there is no right and wrong, there is simply hold on let me just pop some pills or kill the kid or whatever then i can do whatever i want to do all over again and have no problem because it wont affect me later. that is what is wrong with this country.this is the best article and alysa i firmly agree with you and verity
-
Permalink Reply by Angel Barrera on
-
Abortion is a strong topic there fore good job of doing it Alysa, I enjoy reading it. Well am definitely against abortion and I do know that there are special circumstances were women’s that were abuse can think of the abortion, I really can‘t imagine how they feel. I speak only to the people that do it like it was an easy solution , I think is the most cold and horrible way that a human can kill. I cant imagine what kind of people would be in favor of this cruel way to end the life of a little creature that can’t defend him self.
-
Permalink Reply by Jessica on -
first I would like to let you know that I liked the way you wrote your essay.
As the topic for abortion I think this is so an interesting topic that anyone is not taking to much importance so I think you did a great job chosing this topic.
Everyone is thinking only about the economy now days. I know is important but we should care as well for the abortion since is getting out of place.
Im totally disagree with abortion and I think is ridiculous some of the candidates are even thikining about making abortion legal. I know that some woman think that they have a reason to abort but abortion is not the only way to solve the problem. People that are agree with abortion have no feelings. I have no idea how woman can make the decision to abort. There is some other ways to solve their problem. women can think about adoption if they dont want the baby.
Im agre with you saying that Ideas have consequences..
-
Permalink Reply by Bianca Vargas on
-
i have always been against abortion, but i had never thought about it in every perspective that you have put it. I think byfar i have been most interested in your topic. ihad never thought about everything you can notice in someones personality with abortion. Ihave never thought outside the box than the actual issue. from now on i will look at everything in different perspectives, your essay has really made me think.
-
Permalink Reply by Alex Jones-Duffey on
-
I loved the way you put this together and the controversy that is stirred by it. I myself am Pro-Choice and I think too often pro-choice is simply deemed as pro-abortion, which is definitely not thew case. I dont think its a simple question of life and death, there are too many variables that are put into play in the discussion of this subject to simply view this as white and black when there is clearly a gray area. I will agree with the statement "A tree is only as good as its roots." Looking at the general morals and values of a candidate can often set a precident of what their policies will look like and ultimately, who will be affected by them.
-
Permalink Reply by Diondra on
-
You said it Alex! It also seems that people tend to get "regulation" and abortion mixed up--it does not and should not mean the same thing. Of course using abortion as a means of birth control is wrong, but as you've said, there is a gray area (medical/rape) where maybe it can be justified.
-
Permalink Reply by Cyrstal on
-
How can some of these candidates sit here a say that they are for abortion, they dont think about who abortion is affecting. Lets put them in someone elses shoes, for example lets say their daughter gets pregnant and she is so to say "just a baby", do you think for one second they will let their daughter get an abortion. If they do then they have no heart. This is a very big topic for me. How would they feel if thie parents told them that before they were born that their parents were thinking about getting an abortion they wouldnt be here today, i dont think they would like that. I have (HAD)so many friends that are to young to get pregnant and say that they werent ready or cant afford it, when someone gets an unexpected pregnancy its not the end of the world. All of these people use to be great friends of mine but when they came to me with this descision of "Abortion" i gave them the option of doing that or losing a freind. I am really sorry to all the friends i have walked away from during these hard times but abortion is not what i stand for.
-
Permalink Reply by Melissa Alvarado on
-
Abortion is and will always be a very controversial topic to discuss, but personally i think abortion is wrong. like many people have said there are exceptions where i beleive that is it acceptable to go through with an abortion for example the "grey areas"other than that i think it is very wrong when women coose to kill their babies one after the other and still choose not to use contraceptives, afterall that is what they made them for.....
About
Badge
© 2010 Created by Lennie Irvin on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
