Talking to some people is like talking to a wall. Except a wall might be more open-minded and responsive.Along with about 80% of the blogosphere, a couple of days ago I had a snarky laugh at the expense of the infamous Duggars of the 17 (and counting) kids. For this I received some flack from SUZANNE of BigBlueWave, who postulated that my opinion -- "it's just not cool" -- makes me "anti-choice" because I didn't "support" Mrs. Duggar's choice (to crank out kids ad infinitum). In SUZANNE's comment section, I politely(!) and handily dismantled this little straw man by clarifying the distinctions between supporting the right of "choice" in principle and agreeing with individual choices. Just because I'm pro-choice, it doesn't automatically follow that I must agree with all the choices; just the right to make them. That's where it ends for me. The actual choices people make, well... heh... some of them are good snark-fodder, but that's it.
As I said in SUZANNE's comment section, there's a vast difference between supporting the right of personal "choice" and agreeing with the individual choices made. Mrs. Duggar has a right to choose 17 or 70 kids, or none -- I support her right to choose, whether I agree with her actual choice is a non-issue. She has sovereignty over herself and can make her own choices; beyond supporting her right to do so, it's nobody's business. (However, when people choose to shine a public light on their private lives as the Duggars have, as others such as Cindy Sheehan have, they invite commentary, positive and negative. And snark. Mustn't forget snark.)
To make things really, really simple: someone working in his garden has the right to choose to leave his rake anywhere he wants. Maybe he then chooses to leave it standing up with the rake end on the bottom. Not the choice I'd make, and I'd even characterize it as a Bad Choice, because... Later he walks by, steps on the rake and the handle whacks him in the noggoon. Me: amazed and amused, but not ready to take away the guy's right to decide how to deal with his gardening implements. See how this works?
It's telling that SUZANNE et al can't grasp the concept of supporting the right to make a choice they don't agree with. SUZANNE isn't a stupid woman -- there's something else at work here, the anti-choice movement's fundamental lack of respect for the sovereignty of self.
I do think it's ironic that people who can make sense of a concept like "Love the sinner, hate the sin" find it so difficult to conceive of the idea that supporting choice in principle doesn't mean supporting all the choices. I unequivocally support the right to choose, but reserve my own right to be amazed, amused and even a bit appalled by some of the choices made.
UPDATE: More so-con pap. Leonard here seems to think I should be thanking my lucky stars for those bigass families because they'll be supporting my retirement. Newsflash, pally: 40 years of busting my ass working and paying CPP premiums, and making smart investments in property, RRSPs, mutual funds etc. will be paying for MY retirement. Those kids will be paying for YOURS.
|