Recently I came across some very interesting rhetoric on
Facebook. Abortion being the controversial
topic it is I was surprised to see this come across my news feed:
As many of us know, Planned Parenthood is known for
providing abortions to women across America. With abortion being such an
opinionated topic people were guaranteed to respond to such a powerful image. The
response I encountered was a female in my age group who was stating the claim
that pulling funds on organizations like Planned Parenthood was especially detrimental.
Her argument to this was that 97% of the services Planned Parenthood provides
do not include abortions and that pulling funding means pulling funding for sexual
education, breast exams, and other healthcare services not just abortions. But
that is not the problem. The problem in her rhetoric is the fact that she did
this by completely attacking the person who posted the picture. She claims “things
like this boils my blood” and “I hate people who cannot see what good this
company does”. This is what I think is wrong with the current and following
generations. Instead of letting the facts make her argument she decided to turn
to angry words. Being someone who is against abortion, even though I did not comment on the picture I felt personally attacked
and wanted to yell at her, call her stupid and prove her wrong. When individuals act like this in these
situations it causes people to shut down or fight to be the one who is right.
This makes it harder and harder for generations to have meaningful discussions
that can lead to legitimate conclusions which will further their thinking. Is
this what our world is becoming? Is there no way to make a sophisticated argument
without attacking the one that you talking to?
*I believe that Susan G Komen has chosen to return to funding Planned Parenthood*
Ashley, this post just makes me smile! It's silly, I know, but I can't help it--it's just uncanny how similarly we see the issue. I completely agree that incendiary, hyperbolic speech is killing rational discussions in our society. People can't sit down and listen to others' opinions about "hot-button" issues like abortion (or gay marriage, global warming, the Middle East, etc.) because the arguments have become so polarized. Instead of reasoning through difficult issues and trying to compromise, we dive into insulting each other. This especially bothers me because it's set a standard of hatred in America's political world. (I hope I'm not getting off an a tangent here, haha.) Republicans and Democrats have resolved not to agree on anything, and respond to everything with distrust and anger. For example, when Obama presented alternative ways of working abortion into health care plans (alternatives that would make such coverage elective) Republicans were offended and made a fuss! I don't approve of abortion either, but that doesn't mean I won't even compromise on the issue. Our politicians--and more than that, even our fellow citizens--need to learn to approach every issue (even the divisive ones!) with a willingness to understand and reach an agreement. We need to somehow learn not to hate people merely for their stance on a few issues. Until we do, will we ever truly "discuss" an issue and come to the best possible resolution?
ReplyDeleteYes! Thats another thing that drove me crazy. Obama was just trying to provide another option, one which I am clearly against but I understand that not everyone is, and all poloticians and clergy men wanted to do was argue about it. I personally think that birth control and other contraceptives should be provided rather than killing a child. While I agree with neither of these two, I can understand that not everyone in the world sees it the same way as do. I choose to let my opinions affect my choices, not everyone else. If these people continue to fight no one will get any help which is worse than providing safe abortions. I don't want anyone to choose abortion over adoption, but I would rather a legal, safe, and affordable abortions rather than get a backdoor one in a sketchy room because that is all the person can afford. Ok I completely went off on a tangent there I'm done now. Haha
DeleteI agree wholeheartedly on the problems that come with abandoning civil argumentation. Its counterintuitive to progress and it suggests a slippery slope as to how far away from the topic an argument can go. This is far too present in contemporary politics and it needs to be remedied asap.
ReplyDelete