A guest post by lp, as part of our Blogging for Choice.
My top hope is a broader hope about (for want of a better way to put it) our moral sensibilities. When Obama spoke of setting aside childish things, I couldn’t help but think of the simple-minded morality that has accompanied the Bush era: we see good and bad, black and white; other nations are either our bedfellows or our enemies; human beings are either persons (American citizens) or beasts (terrorist suspects, Arabs, Muslims who are ‘too Muslim’). To my mind, this cowboys-and-Indians view of the moral landscape fuels, among other things, anti-choice propaganda: Fetuses are innocent, right? So that must make them the good guys. And that must make women whose lives can’t accommodate them bad guys. And a righteous people needn’t concern itself with the rights of bad guys.
It strikes me that there’s a reason we humans have spent most of our history pining for omniscience somewhere in the heavens: morality is really tricky. There are a mind-boggling multitude of shades of grey, and competing concerns, and utterly-conflicting but equally-important rights and worthinesses. Blinkering ourselves and refusing to see this does not make for righteous living: it makes for wilful, childish ignorance. Yet the Bush dogma has embraced, globally, just this approach.
So, my top Pro-Choice hope is that we all remember to have a good hard think about how the Bush era has shaped our moral reasoning, and that we as a nation make sure to set aside childish things.