CMJR 450

Week Eight Reponse

Social movements and opposing movements (voices) argue with each other because they believe their case to be just or (slightly) the better choice। Our text states that it is more difficult for social movements in arguing their view over opposing ones because they “have limited resources and find it difficult to prove that an institution, competing movement, norm, or value is utterly without value.” (PASM, pg.248) You cannot make everybody happy, so what do you do when a social movement and opposing movement have equal support? For example: Pro-life vs Pro-choice. Do you think one movement is more just than the other? What beliefs and/or ethics support your views? Does it always have to be black or white, or should ethical values be viewed in grey?

Ethics of abortion is a tough issue and has been argued about for years. However, the recent slaying of Dr. George Tiller has cultivated discussion around the topic. Pro-lifers recently denounced the act calling it a heinous act at the same time their movement fuels this behavior. “Should an innocent human being be killed for the crime of another.” (PaSM, 242) This quote from the text brings attention to the pro-life movement. Does this justify such a horrific act? The dichotomy between the two movements is interesting due to there shared popularity. Although the pro-life movement does have a slight advantage according to the text it does not give the movement more authority. The pro-life movement’s main tenet is the right to control one’s body and the death of the fetus is an unavoidable consequence of choosing not to continue their pregnancy. A woman has an ethical claim to personal, bodily autonomy and must be regarded as fundamental to the conception of any ethical, democratic, and free society. The readings talk about the idea of the four points of comparison on the issue they are: quality, quantity, value and hierarchy.  The four points are intertwined in the reasoning and rhetoric behind the movements. The anti-abortion movement is not making any attempts to harness the evil that they perpetuate. Dr. Tiller is a recent example of their rhetoric in action. Taking the life of one to justify the death of a fetus is tough message to sell the audience. Given the ethical dilemma between the two movements it is a gray area. That is fundamentally my reasoning and the beauty of our Country is that you have the right to choose.