Remember when Stephen Colbert coined the word “truthiness“? “Truthiness is a “truth” that a person claims to know intuitively “from the gut” or because it “feels right” without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.”
I now coin the word “choiciness.” Same idea. Choiciness is a choice that a person defends vehemently because it “feels right” and “sounds good” without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.
How did I come to coin this word? After discussing abortion with two Carleton University students on campus radio yesterday for an hour.
Upstanding young people of good will, I must hasten to add.
But the gist of the conversation was this: Abortion is bad. It should not be used as birth control. It can cause harm. But it must remain a choice.
I don’t actually disagree all too vehemently. It must not remain a choice in our minds and hearts, but people are certainly free to make their own monumental life errors.
They were truly hung up on the legislative side of things. But given how hung up they were on that, they couldn’t even come forward and say abortion is a terrible choice.
At the outset I explained that I believe in a “Canada without abortion. By choice.” And the host said, so how does that make you different from pro-choicers?
It makes me very different, because I can identify that abortion is a horrible, terrible, life-ending choice that is incompatible with human dignity and true concepts of freedom. Some things are not a choice. And whether or not the state tells me there is a law on this matter, I will always know it is wrong. It’s not confusing. There’s no debate about when life begins.
I was there with a Catholic chaplain on campus, who tried his darndest to explain concepts of what true freedom, true love and community mean from a Christian perspective. It all made sense to me, and I would have liked to hear more. But the worldview is so substantially different from the one that says FREE CHOICE IS OUR HIGHEST VALUE, that I fear it fell on deaf ears.They should interview him, one on one, about the worldview stuff. Would be interesting.
I remain optimistic, though. Because even these ardent supporters of choice were not ardent supports of abortion, and that came through loud and clear.
by 
The law is a teacher however, which is the thinking behind making abortion illegal once again. People don’t murder because we have laws against murder; they don’t steal because we have laws to punish thieves; the same would apply for abortion. While the law does not guarantee that all will follow it, the majority do.
Having abortion outlawed is a huge step in having people understand what exactly is wrong with abortion.
Julie, I understand what you are saying, partly, but I personally don’t murder because I know it is wrong, and not because there is a law against murder. Ditto on the stealing.
We need laws, and I’d like those laws to be just. Obviously it is not just to disqualify one group of humans from humanity on a whim. But on the flip side my personal morality is not dictated by what is in those laws.
I do think people are swayed by the law, however, and that may well be what has happened on abortion. It became legal, therefore it became neutral in the eyes of some/many.
But to return to a state where abortion would be illegal once again requires a cultural shift to precede that action. And once the cultural shift happens, it won’t really matter what the law says.
I think we have to begin by addressing the deficiency in the Canadian criminal code which explicitly dehumanizes the unborn child. First recognize the reality that the unborn child is a human being. Then deal with the issue of whether some human beings do not deserve moral respect and the protection of the law. If our laws are going to permit abortion, let’s at least have the guts to face up to what abortion really is.
Aside from that, we shouldn’t be forced to fund this atrocity through our taxes. Those who truly want it to be a private matter should stop forcing everyone to pay for it.