The absurd moralism of abortion opponents
Comment published on New York Times online blog, in response to opinion essay by Michelle Oberman and W. David Ball, ”When we talk about abortion, let’s talk about men,” June 2, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/02/opinion/abortion-laws-men.html?action=click&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=Article®ion=Footer&contentCollection=Opinion:
We live in a land of excess moralism, often absurd, which this article is a reminder of.
Suppose that moral liability consists of any action that is a cause of a consequence that is deemed undesirable. You get into a car crash and (though sober and not reckless) are prosecuted for driving. You are raped in an ally and are guilty of provoking it with a short skirt or being out alone. If something bad or unwanted happens, someone must be blamed, or you must have done something wrong. Otherwise, there would have to be something wrong with the world that it isn't made flawlessly happy by an all-powerful benevolent God. So too, people who have sex should be down for paying the consequences. A bit of enjoyment, followed by a life of expensively and burdensomely raising a child you may or may not have wanted. You laugh at real peril: I have heard people say this. When you can moralize, God and world are set right again, and it's so easy, not even requiring any real thought.
For all that is said, in the end I am not sure that any of the abortion opponents I have heard pontificate over the years have meant much more than that they are against sexual freedom and for compulsory marriage and child-rearing to gratify a puritan lust for punishing pleasure.
If these mostly Christian moralists were less moralistic and more Christian, they would say that sex is best when part of love and childrearing best when done with the even greater care that it calls for.