Why oh why oh why OH WHY does anyone ever go with the “it’s always existed” or “it’s entirely natural” argument in defending his or her cause?
Goodness me. If I’ve heard it once, I’ve heard it a million times. Abortion has always existed, and therefore, it’s necessary and right, say abortion supporters. Prostitution, ditto.
This letter defending how natural prostitution is, is the impetus for today’s rant:
Prostitution is a natural phenomenon. Slamming and condemning governments and politicians for not doing anything about it is no solution, and shows a misunderstanding of the attitudes of many Canadians.
I find these arguments embarrassing because they are so easily refuted. Just because something is longstanding does not make it right. I read in today’s Post that in Albania, the family members of murderers have to go into permanent hiding because of a cultural tradition whereby the wounded family is allowed to knock off one of the murderer’s family. Ah, blood feud, vigilante justice. Been around for centuries–and therefore it must be good! On what planet does this pass for logic?
The other thing is that what is natural is often not right. Social liberals don’t understand this because they view human nature as being essentially good. Social conservatives do (or, ahem, should) because they think that evil is found in every human heart and therefore, just because it may feel natural to be drawn to porn, to use a woman for sex or even to kill someone–doesn’t make it right. (We (ok, I) almost enjoy my personal struggle against some of my evil, yet natural, tendencies, and we (ok, I) generally go to the person concerned to apologize and to God for forgiveness when we (I) fail. But I’m digressing now.)
“It’s natural” isn’t a great argument, except where there are other substantive arguments to be made. Otherwise it should be reserved for moments such as my defence of moving to deodorant instead of anti-perspirant.
Here ends the rant.
_______________________
Brigitte adds: I believe I read somewhere that murder was a pretty old thing, too. Cain, I believe, invented it. Or maybe it was Brutus. Not sure. So, can I go out and murder those who stand in my way?
______________________
Andrea adds: Go to town, Brigitte. People have been doing it for a long while so it’s AOK.
______________________
Véronique adds: Ah the “natural” argument… I’ve heard it from every side: abortion is natural, working mothers are against nature, the list goes on.
It’s like “progress”, which is usually a good thing –pro-choice people think themselves as “progressive” – until it isn’t: abortion has happened throughout the ages, why fight it?
Or like “animals”: pro-lifers – anti-choice – view women as breeding stock … until you get to sterilization and euthanasia. Then treating people like animals is the dignified thing to do.
Antibiotics, vaccines and c-sections are not natural. Unlike abortion.
by
dc says
Strychnine is natural.
Suricou Raven says
I too find this ‘natural = good’ argument to be simply stupid. But, coming from the other side of the political divide, I am more often annoyed by it’s inverse ‘unnatural = evil’ counterpart.
Nicola says
There’s actually a name for this argument: the naturalistic fallacy.