[he has just been published book Mujer y Realidad abortion. A multidisciplinary approach , which contains the proceedings of the First International Conference on Multidisciplinary Women and reality of abortion ", held in Cáceres in March 2007. The event was organized by the English Family Forum and the Association of Friends of that forum, with the help of the University of Extremadura. now revert to abortion is very timely because we are in the socialist offensive. As is well known, the government is urgent and has committed to prepare before the end of the year the draft of the new law has a central idea: "There will be abortion on demand, without having to rely on course or qualification, to a number of weeks of pregnancy that can be between 12 and 16. "( El País, 11-VII-2008 ).
José Antonio Alonso , socialist spokesman, commented to the media about the recent Congress of the PSOE: "It feels a progressive direction." Background is that abortion bill.
Palpate or, for the English, to touch, to feel, is a completely regular verb: I felt, you feel, it feels ... Faced with such a warm word, Juan Manuel de Prada can not endure: "... if you become aware of a lot, go out with his hands painted with blood. Socialists advocate a 'reform avant-garde " the abortion law that "guarantees legal security of women who choose abortion" and its "right to decide." Since then, Hannibal Lecter would not have made a more refined euphemistic advocacy of cannibalism that we offer the Socialists on abortion. A cowardly abort without further impediment that setting an arbitrary deadline of gestation, they call it "reform avant-garde", to the impunity of the offender baptized "legal certainty", to call it a criminal offense, at the height of the cunning, 'right to decide. " It should, of course, a mug like Leatherface, the virtuoso of the electric saw The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, to corrupt language as crass and fierce. "( ABC, 7-VII-2008 ) this what is called progress? José Luis Requero , Member of the Supreme Judicial Council, said: "We should ask if the quintessence of progressivism is a mother to kill the unborn baby, and from this, what will be more progressive? Do it by decapitation, dismemberment or injection of saline? "( Reason, 28-I-2008)
Lighter can not be said and that's it. Not a question of right or left, but to respect the life of the child expected, or to kill him in a more or less sophisticated. The psychiatrist Luis Rodríguez Rojas, defined on the left, also speaks so throw yourself: "Let's face it, how is it possible that liberal-leaning groups that have done much good in our society to support values \u200b\u200bsuch as democracy, solidarity, pacifism, the fight against domestic violence, ecology, human rights or the abolition of the death penalty, then be able to not realize that abortion is one of the evils that cause more damage to women of our country? (...) This morning walking the Faculty of Medicine of our beloved University I read a poster that read: We are on the left not to abortion. I could never agree more with a statement. "( El Ideal de Granada, 2-II-2008)
In the media and the discussions seem to get more than the abortion of" abortion. " It does not hurt to recall the famous words of Julián Marías : "Sometimes you use an expression of refined hypocrisy to describe induced abortion: it says is the" interruption of pregnancy. " Supporters of the death penalty have resolved their difficulties. The gallows or the club can be called 'stopping breathing' and a couple of minutes is sufficient. When it causes abortion or hangs, you kill someone. And it is more hypocritical considering that there are differences depending on where the pass is the child who is, how far of weeks or months after birth will be surprised by death. (...) Is to act as Hamlet in Shakespeare's drama, which strikes Polonius with his sword when it is hidden behind the curtain. Some people do not dare to hurt the child more than when it is hidden, you'd think-protected in the womb. "
now publish the text of the paper entitled" The abortion in the media, which Alejandro Navas presented at the Congress of Cáceres to which we referred at the beginning of these lines. Navas chosen newspaper El Pais , World , ABC, La Razón , La Vanguardia and El Periódico , to collect a sufficient climate of public opinion. And he analyzed what these newspapers have published about abortion in the three preceding years.]
# 440 Vita Category-Euthanasia Abortion and
by Alejandro Navas
_________________
The theme of this paper is complex, for being the world media. We are facing a phenomenon of great breadth and diversity: media-newspapers and magazines, radio, television, Internet, telephone, local media, regional, national and international one-person companies and multinational groups that employ thousands of people, are also an almost unlimited variety of editorial principles, cultures and moods, both among the media and among people that make or manage. It is therefore inaccurate and even talk about the media distorting bloc, without qualification, as if it were a single social actor.
This motley crowd of media plays a variety of functions, which characterize classic so as to inform, entertain and persuade. It is also discussing whether to form their own task of the media, but I will not treat this issue now. The development and dissemination of content are not made in a vacuum but are influenced by non-communicative constraints, mainly economic and political. The media are businesses, arising from the initiative of people who risk their money and work to provide goods and services, with those waiting to amortize the investment and profit, or at least avoid losses. Not losing money is a prerequisite for the survival of any media. Making money is almost always a target is not negligible, it can sometimes become the main or even sole purpose of their activity.
Apart from the economic conditioning, it is easy for the communication task to be influenced by ideological or political approaches. Owners and editors and publishers have a more or less explicit the world, man and society, of what is desirable or objectionable, what benefits or harms to the community to which they are addressed. Often this approach leads to the media to embrace causes certain or even fully engage in partisan political struggle. The media is no longer devote time to tell you what happens, but aim to become the protagonists of direct social action, as if the role of mere chroniclers knew them a little. When they talk about themselves the media like to present themselves as the mirror of society: "We just reflect what happens," they say, but today we know that the mirror image is false. There is no mirror outside society capable objectively reflect what happens in it. The ideal of pure objectivity has long since been debunked as a myth that is still invoked by inertia, which does not mean it is impossible to be thorough and accurate reporting.
In view of what has been said, it is noted that many media should carry out delicate balance to reconcile the information with economic interests and political or ideological. If you look at the purely informative, we know that the news value of any communication is directly proportional to its improbability, it seems most unlikely entry has a greater capacity to arouse our attention. Predictability and customary, however, only raises interest. And it so happens, it can be tragic, that we have an extraordinary ability to get used even to the most terrible, as long as it is repeated often enough. This particular configuration of the human psyche has a decisive impact on the activity of the media, and determines the selection of content offered to their audiences, since it is clear that the overwhelming complexity of reality can not be copied over to the limited space told by the media. It is understood that normal, ordinary and predictable, will have little ability to attract public attention. There will therefore to look for the "man bites dog" is much more newsworthy than his opponent.
Media offer many aspects worthy of study, as is typical of any complex reality. And as the media largely defines the reality of the world, not surprising that the scientific disciplines that deal with communication experience tremendous growth in recent decades. A classic field of study in this context is the content analysis: it comes to analyzing the issues presented in the media, what can be done from a quantitative or qualitative. In the first case of measuring space dedicated to the issues, while the second is to focus attention on the way in presenting the issues, to the position taken by the media to address them. We have already seen that there is absolute neutrality. The decisions that determine the publication of any news that her location, the extent to be assigned, the owner and the intro, the possible accompanying chart, and all that without mentioning the text to be published or read before microphones and cameras, are charged opinion, evaluation on the relevance of the act and how to treat it. No wonder that the old distinction between the kinds of information and opinion is losing ground in both professional practice and in scientific thinking.
If we talk about abortion and the media, a first approximation would be to analyze what the media have said about this subject over a certain period. Consider all means would be an impossible task, what is usual in such cases is to choose a limited sample but representative enough, just as in the opinion polls or surveys are not interviewing the entire population but a sample that if well selected, faithfully represents the general feeling. In this case I decided to look for on the nationally syndicated newspapers. It is true that radio and television are mass media, which reach almost the entire population, but the consensus among experts in recognizing the influence of the press in the ideas and behavior of groups, but less massive, it is deeper than the audiovisual media. So I chose the newspapers El Pais, El Mundo, ABC, La Razón, La Vanguardia and El Periódico, to collect a sufficient climate of public opinion. There was no need to select a limited sample because the first thing to check is that the references to abortion are rare. In this way, I could analyze what these newspapers have published on our subject in the last three years. I will not bore you with the presentation of tables and figures, as would be usual in quantitative content analysis, and step by making some more qualitative in nature.
The first thing you notice is the irrelevance of this issue seems to be for the national press. Should be completed, however, that this behavior is not generalizable to all print media published in Spain. If you look at national publications but also dissemination of reduced circulation, there is also the group Intereconomía with magazines like Time or Alba, or La Gaceta de los Negocios. There are also a number of digital media with equal warmth embrace the cause of life and with good arguments to oppose the hegemonic culture of death: Zenit, Hispanic, New Woman, HazteOir, Forum Libertas, e-cristians, Provida Press, Arbil. Aceprensa agency collaboration combines both the paper and Internet. Sites also abound of institutions that work for life, from the Family Policy Institute to the Association of Victims of Abortion through the Life Foundation and blogs of people who echo these approaches. Although Spain is lagging behind the leading countries in the world for Internet penetration and usage, also here the network is increasingly serving to voice many people or institutions who do not feel adequately represented by traditional means hegemonic. The technology clearly works in favor of democratization, to give voice to marginalized many partners that otherwise would not find the possibility to contribute to these debates, or even open them when they have the ability to define the public agenda have ruled that certain issues should disappear from the agenda.
Go back to the national newspapers: the references to abortion are noteworthy for their scarcity. And often they have to do with what happened in other countries: recent legislative initiative and referendum in Portugal, legislative changes in Colombia or Mexico, debates in Nicaragua, Chile or Argentina, abortion and infanticide in China and India, episodes of passionate debate in the United States facing the pro-choice to pro life, the Pope's statements year of his magisterium, or the activities in Spain of special envoys from foreign media, as has happened in recent months with British and Danish journalists who revealed the shocking circumstances surrounding the "abortion paradise" that is become our country. Although they focused on the clinical activity of Barcelona, \u200b\u200bsimilar reports have been written or filmed in other cities English, of course. Of course there are news data provided by the Ministry of Health on abortions performed each year, may even deserve some editorial comment. Another source mentions are the actions of WHO's field of the health status of women in the world, particularly so in poor countries or developing, trying to make abortion one of the elements that integrate the so-called "reproductive health". In much of the world, "though no doubt in this respect Spain plays a leading role since coming to power of the government of Rodriguez Zapatero, will debate on key issues concerning the life and the human person: status of the embryo, assisted reproduction and cloning, sexuality and gender, marriage and family status of women, euthanasia. In this context there is often too marginal references to abortion. In the political sphere the news the United Left timid attempts to liberalize further the current abortion law, incorporating the social course. These proposals fail repeatedly in Parliament, also with governments of the PSOE, as unnecessary. As is known, the abusive application of the law in force effectively becomes a law without forcing deadlines too far as to establish a regime of abortion on demand.
A first remarkable aspect of abortion is undoubtedly the growing dimension of the phenomenon. Many abortions performed, and also their number is growing steadily year by year. It turns out that even his supporters worry. El Pais wrote on December 31, 2004: "There is a positive factor in the health report on the practice of abortion in Spain in 2003. The number continues to rise 79,788 compared to 77,000 the previous year, but for once there was a moderation in this trend. The abortion was performed in 2003 at 15.3% of pregnancies, compared to 15.6% in 2002. But, despite this inflection down, the number of abortions-an act always traumatic for women and should be decided freely and responsibly, is still very high. Is disproportionate 15.3% of pregnancies end in abortion. Reveals the gaps that hinder the sexual education in Spain, the failure of family planning policies and, in general, the lack of updated information on methods of preventing pregnancy and how to access them. Abortion can not become a routine method, but in the last resort to resolve an unwanted pregnancy. " I will not dwell on discourse analysis of that editorial, and not in the language used, both very revealing of the mentality represented by the culture of death that looks set to become political correctness. The text continues with a paragraph devoted to the morning-after pill, which of course does not refer to its possible abortifacient action: "Even the increasing use of morning-after pill 300,000 users in 2003 - and that seems to be the cause of the slowdown in the growth rate of abortion, may be related to inadequate sex education and the failure of planning policies. A complex hormonal emergency, such as the morning-after pill, can not become habitual. Is missing that law increasingly integral on sexual and reproductive health promised by the Government as a complement to the legislation on abortion and more decisive actions on sex education in school. "
After a year, little has changed. "The number of abortions in Spain has increased by 73% in 10 years," the chronicle called The Country on the report submitted by the Ministry of Health on abortion in 2004 (December 27, 2005, p. 22). The owner of the editorial of that day can not be more expressive: "It triggers the abortion" (p. 10). "Nearly 85,000 women seeking an abortion to terminate her pregnancy in 2004. The figure represents an increase of 73% compared to 1995 and reveals that English society has a public health problem that requires urgent correction. The data are disturbing ... We need to consider the resounding failure of policies to prevent teenage pregnancy given that three of every four pregnancies under 19 years voluntarily interrupt ... Finally, one might point out a cause that cuts across all groups and all ages: a tendency to underestimate the risks of certain sexual behaviors and some trivialization of the PCP and abortion as a solution, knowing that is an insult to the organism that is best avoided. " Like did the editorial of 2004, also here ends with a warning against the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases: "The increase in behaviors that involve the risk of unwanted pregnancy is very serious because it often involves while a risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS. "
could comment on the language used widely and, above all, the merits of the argument, which would reveal any underlying anthropology. Behind the apparently conciliatory tone and concerned about public health positions found disturbing: it is well to note that the abortion caused involves an assault on the mother's body that can bring with harmful consequences, but where is the mention of the final and irreparable attack the fetus? I just let the issue targeted.
I referred to data for the years 2003 and 2004. In 2005 he again recorded a substantial increase in the number of abortions: 91,000, according to official estimates. In reality the figure should be higher, because apart from that clandestine abortions are still not covered by these statistics, it is not easy to estimate the impact should be allocated half a million pills a day then distributed among women, an amount similar to that of 2004. This time the country simply to give notice of the data, without editorial comment. The owner, how could it be otherwise, echoes of the increase: "The number of abortions totaled 91,600, a 7.8% increase in one year" (www.elpais.com, December 30, 2006 ), but the text is removed iron to that fact: "Despite this increase, rates remain among the lowest in the European Union and countries like the United States and Canada, where there are between 11 and 25 per 1,000, according to Health. " The comfort is not because they want to, we might add.
From 2000 to 2005 have been officially practiced in Spain, 463,000 abortions. The first reaction of our health authorities to this alarming development is to take every possible release of the data, a typical reaction of ostrich thinking that put your head in the hole and avoid facing the problem will get at least silence the debate.
Along with the pure physical scale of the phenomenon is necessary to emphasize their social invisibility. The most influential media devote little attention. And when, for example, pro-life groups are mobilizing to denounce the practice, does a sort of pact of silence that leads to more representative of the establishment media to avoid any mention of such activities. This clearly applies a double standard because statements or representations of minority groups and often extravagant, but swim with the tide of political correctness can be assured of coverage even disproportionately by those same means, which thus become speaker of the strangest claims. As is evident, anything that helps to propagate the dominant versions of gender ideology on the rise: homosexuality, transsexuality, bisexuality, along with other approaches and more veterans: feminism, pacifism, environmentalism, that can be combined with multiple variants. The same CIS surveys that record the absence of abortion among the issues that concern English tell us that homosexuality is not a relevant issue for people, it does not prevent that in recent years has become ubiquitous in the media: simply look out any debate television show, late show or reality show, fiction series current national or social gathering in order to raise the issue, with a downright belligerent tone most of the time. The same happens in the so-called gossip and to a lesser extent, in the daily press. Has never been a divorce between what most worries the audience and what they offer media but investigate the reasons for this phenomenon, we deviate from our theme.
When scientists, politicians, journalists and intellectuals in general talk about the problems of our society, almost never mentioned abortion. It is as if there were. How can you think off each year more than one hundred thousand lives in the womb is something minor? Can we admit that something like this happens without a trace, in mothers and their families, the medical profession that lends itself to this criminal practice, in men who so often leave to pregnant or pushing abortion, in political and health authorities to manage this "health benefit" in doing business with it? The victims of terrorism, domestic violence or traffic accidents make us react, how could it be less, and result in relevant discussions aimed at identifying risk factors and appropriate solutions, both in the field of prevention and the penalty. For fetuses no consideration whatsoever, both literally and figuratively in the term. The contempt for human life that beats in this lack of scruples can not go unpunished and there is an invoice: psychiatric consultations are filled with women suffering from post-abortion syndrome, since one can not fool mother nature and know well with their hands stained with blood, and in the social field is established a kind of brutality that is helping to fuel the tension that pervades the most public forums, from the parliamentary tribune to radio talk. Violence is a kind of baseline, which is a heavy burden to our society. Next to street violence is a simple story.
The abortion is not just invisible, it is impolite to talk about it. This peculiar situation contradicts the general trend of our information society, where transparency is a supreme principle that should permeate the whole public, and not only as regards politics. Who is considered to subtract something to the public debate is guilty eo ipso, something will have to hide when you try to hide from the gaze of others. Public opinion and the media at their service, are considered entitled to know everything. This trend lies a deeper wisdom, vital for healthy democracy, as power always tends to the occult, it is desirable to promote the publicity of the debates. And who avoids publicly account for their activity seems to have no good arguments to defend his position or, worse still, not fair play and having something to hide. Corruption has always accompanied the political and economic activity, but his remedy is never in secrecy. It is questionable whether this trend in our society also includes the private lives of actors, which feeds the voyeur, which can not be understood, of course, without the consideration of the exhibitionism of many of these actors, who seem to live by and for foci. The cameras do not stop it look more rugged history. We must provide increasingly strong emotions to an audience that otherwise runs the risk of getting used to, bored ... and change the channel, a tragedy to be avoided at any cost.
In this context peculiar to our society draws attention to the occult that surrounds the practice of abortion. Woe to him who dares to offer the public images of an abortion or the remains of an aborted fetus! Be disqualified as a fascist or fundamentalist. We know everything about everyone, without accepting limits on the most intimate and private areas, and the tackiness and vulgarity of many information products get stronger sentences cause critics more tolerant and less dogmatic, but everything that surrounds the practice of abortion can not speak. Who dares to do so will be disqualified as a terrorist threat to social peace (even if the peace of the graveyard). The guilty conscience we must assume behind this pact should not mention make us think, but it seems that the intellectual function is also banned, and very few have the courage or the necessary independence of opinion to undermine these taboos.
The activity of the media and the public that contribute to form not a cloak or blanket to be thrown on society from outside, but come from the dynamism of this society, which constitutes both the content their posts as the party you are going. What does this peculiar climate of opinion generated on abortion on our society?
is true that there have always been abortions, Hippocrates did not speak for talk, but the current situation is unique and novel in more ways than one. On the one hand, is the massive nature of abortion practice, which seems logically correspond to social and mass industrial civilization. The scientific and technological advances, which allow to separate sexuality and reproduction, make feasible the universalization of abortion, so we have a particular type of genocide, to put a buzzword. Here there is a particular racial, religious or social determinant of the death of the unborn, but they are not accepted by the living, parents and public authorities more specifically.
other hand it is also innovative decriminalization, which in practice is equivalent to legalization "of abortion. Modern man has achieved in many ways an unprecedented degree of civilization. An extremely sensitive and tuned conscience will not allow to act outside the law-the rule of law is one of its achievements and reputation, much less engage in the despicable hypocrisy. The most expeditious way to conduct agreements and principles is no doubt bring the latter to the former. You could blame then, if it is true that we have banished the hypocrisy for the sake of authenticity, we now have the cynicism, as highlighted Robert Spaemann. To quell such criticism, which come from a moral tax even an outmoded and retrograde, it goes a step further and presented the achievements abortion as a real victory for freedom, as a breakthrough in the ethical development of human beings as an essential element of so-called social rights. This approach is reflected, for example, the owner of the extensive report published by El Mundo (January 9, 2007, pp. 28 and 29): "The abortion in the world: crime or social goal?". The newspaper seems to be objective in the treatment of an issue, as that version of objectivity so widespread that it would give room the two conflicting positions on the issue in question, but the owners of the various reviews that make the story are well reveal the position of the newspaper: "The excesses of the pro-life crusade. In the U.S. there have been attacks on clinics, medical death threats and murder "or" A Polish woman lost her sight after being forced to give birth. " The same is true of some of the intros: "The abortions performed in unsafe practices kill 70,000 women a year."
Significantly, for example, that the party abortion in Anglo-Saxon world denomine pro choice. Late aquí una forma de entender la libertad característica de nuestra cultura moderna: libertad como emancipación, como liberación de todo tipo de tabúes, ataduras y prejuicios. En la práctica, significa entonces ampliar al máximo el número de opciones sin excluir ninguna. Tampoco el asesinato en el caso del aborto. Todo lo que se opone a mi libertad o a mi capricho puede ser destruido. No hay nada que merezca un respeto incondicionado, pues ya no hay valores absolutos (más que en la mente de los fundamentalistas).
De esta forma, el aborto queda “normalizado”. Su presencia universal, su homologación ética y legal, y la capacidad que tiene el hombre to get used to the most unusual of course to be repeated with the frequency required, make letter soon acquire full citizenship in our society. Moreover, as demonstrated by the psychology, behavior that is repeated until it becomes habitual and does not need a particular justification. The murder may thus become a routine trivialized, it is the banality of evil that Hannah Arendt saw in action the likes of Adolf Eichmann.
But this "normality", apparently a sign of civilization and maturity, it manages to hide from all the terrible brutality of the facts. The treacherous settlement of so many millions of innocent defenseless reflects a disturbing brutalization of modern man. It seems that, despite the sophistication of our legal systems, we have actually become the law of the strongest. As we warned at the time the German Socialist deputy Adolf Arndt, the legalization of abortion is tantamount to the surrender of the rule of law, which consisted precisely in the voluntary submission of the strongest to the rule of law. Of course it is accepted, making it much to admit, that between mother and fetus is given an insurmountable conflict of interest, no less terrible than the resolution passed by the law is precisely the death of the weaker party, the fetus , just the hands of those whose care is delivered. The womb, safe and welcoming place par excellence, becomes a death trap, the black dot the road of life, also located in the very beginning, which has the highest mortality. Here there is no point system to help reduce mortality. No wonder that, once established in the case of abortion, the principle of "solution" also applies to euthanasia. If we consider that the elderly and infirm are upset and excessive work, and attention conflicts with other interests or preferences of their caregivers, end with them is the most effective way to solve this vexing situation.
seems clear that if no action is taken special social life whenever it imposes the strongest, it will use its discretion arbitrarily. So in the West we can be proud by reason of having exceeded the original state of things and gotten set in place appropriate procedures to resolve certain guarantees of impartiality with the inevitable conflicts that arise among men. And yet, despite the consolidated our achievements, must be monitored continuously to prevent the strong trample the weak. In the economic sphere, for example, this concern is manifested in the existence of antitrust laws. Avoid the most powerful, having done away with small, dominate markets and impose their law. The public debate of the democratic regime itself ensures that all voices are heard and also the legitimate interests of minorities are taken into account. It is regrettable, but the unborn have obvious difficulties in articulating their specific demands, no doubt, would condense into one: respect for their right to live.
The modern can be cynical, but it is also rational and systematic. And feel at heart, as every man, a strong call to consistency. Is in our finite and limited condition that has an inevitable gap between words and actions, but do not support live in flagrant contradiction. Therefore, it imposes the task of making up the principles for which contrast with the behavior not be hurtful. Here intervenes effectively the art of distinction.
In the area of \u200b\u200bethics and anthropology distinguishes between "man" and "person" with a foundation that goes back to Locke. According to this thesis, not all men would be people-that are worthy of respect. Personal status is dependent on the actual presence of certain attributes: memory, self-awareness, ability to reason and to express and defend interests. Those who can not show those requirements would not creditors to respect that people usually pay taxes and could be ignored, or, in the limit removed. It is clear that this concept of person leaves out many people, not just the terminally ill: babies, sleeping, mentally weak, and so on.
On a more strictly biological wealth are other distinctions. For example, which contrasts pre-embryo and embryo. Only the latter deserve respect and protection, while the former would be available for research or therapy (upon liquidation, of course). In turn, it also speaks of two types of embryo: the one in the specimen and the stay in the womb. Only the latter would be the rights holder. Similarly, a distinction between potential life and actual life. Since there is an interest merely arbitrary use of the potential. Others speak of human beings and human life, as distinct realities. Humans, specific individual deserves respect, but not human life (it is understood that the embryo is enclosed in this second category.) So correlative, the difference between human dignity and the dignity of human life. It seems that this is an exercise in spin ", but the intention is clear: the dignity of human life which does not correspond to a specific individual, let your subject in the hands of any manipulator.
The use of the distinction also occurred in the legal field. The key concept here is the "decriminalization." Granted, certain conduct, that the Western tradition has always condemned, should remain a crime. It is not always possible, nor desirable from the strategic standpoint, it would require too much time and effort, so radical change in attitudes of the people and legislators and judges. Just open the door, if only a small slit, some exceptions: these practices are still considered criminal, that is, we keep our values, "but fail to punish in specific and exceptional circumstances. The case of extreme necessity was already covered in the traditional legal systems, so you do not need to invent anything new. Decriminalization thus becomes the first step of the way, sometimes surprisingly short, leading to legalization. Do not forget that the criminal code is a very appropriate reflection of the moral conscience of society. The process is well known and is repeated again and again, horrified rejection, rejection without horror start to get used to this new reality, "recognizing the importance of the issue, which deserves to be studied thoroughly," accepted for some exceptional cases rigorously determined, widespread in fact decriminalization, legalization, peaceful acceptance. Keep in mind also the educational nature of the law, so that in societies as legalistic as ours it is legitimated as good legalized soon.
The massive diffusion of abortion has radically changed the conditions of admission of men in society. So far, this was a natural process, ie, spontaneous. Once the sexual union had paid off, a new human being coming to the world if nothing stops her. Now things have changed. Birth is no longer spontaneous, but has become the subject of an express decision by the living, the children of today planned as a project of common life of their parents. Western societies seem increasingly to these select and exclusive clubs where new members enter through cooptation.
Robert has also been Spaemann who has shown extraordinary what this new situation. Who is the man to decide on the existence of other men? Our decision-making is clearly exceeded. At first, the decision affected the very existence or not, but now began to spread also to the kind of existence. Advances in genetic engineering will enable will soon determine the characteristics of the children. Reproduction incorporates human well the latest trends in industrial production, customers can define the product features or benefits that are acquired, and the assembly combined with mass production efficiency with the identification of products. This mention of the industry is not entirely inappropriate because, although now I can not dwell on his account, while abortion and reproductive technology are a booming business worth many millions. Almost no area of \u200b\u200bhuman activity is losing the primacy of the economy, and when there is big money at stake, the moral or legal barriers tend to fall with amazing ease. This is another feature of society modern, the primacy of economic rationality.
The debate over abortion, that passion to the public at the time, has largely died down (with the exception perhaps of the United States.) The explanation is simple: the abortion, although in practice have been imposed, has run out of arguments. Recent developments in genetics, embryology and technology have solved at a stroke the burning issues discussed with the late sixties. "The former minister who introduced the French abortion change their minds," press reports while writing these pages. In a report issued on June 14 by France 2-specifically on abortions in the eighth month of pregnancy carried out in Spain, Simone Veil has the bravery to acknowledge: "Increasingly, scientific evidence from conception is a living being." Today it makes no sense for pro-abortion women take to the streets with a banner read. "My body is mine." It is clear that the embryo is a kind of cyst or pimple on the body of his mother. Clearly recognizes the headline of the article published in El Pais (December 31, 2006, p. 47): "The new weapon against abortion called a sonogram. U.S. anti-abortion clinics set up 'trap' with disruption centers pregnancy to dissuade their patients. " So compensates strive to consolidate a culture of respect for life, what will be done both in science and in public opinion and social action. Initiatives like this conference, with its multidisciplinary approach, we are leading the way in the right direction.
0 comments:
Post a Comment