Personal Liberty

My recent essay on free speech stressed the importance I place on the rights granted by the first amendment. Beyond this, however, individuals must begin to realize others’ personal values as equal to their own. That is, one must understand that many hold particular beliefs for particular reasons, and allowing them to articulate these reasons is essential to the progression of ideas. This short segment will focus particularly on abortion rights, and what the governments role should be in regulating this. I have switched consistently back and forth in my own personal moral stance on abortion. An individuals has every right to do what he or she may wish to their own body, as enumerated by the natural rights of humans; however, there is a fundamental problem in forcing those who do not agree with this stance to pay for something they view as immoral. If an evangelical christian views abortion as a sin, why should the government have a right to fund abortion programs with the evangelical’s tax dollars. This seems a tricky situation, and it battles a line between infringing on some individual rights — namely, women’s right to an abortion — and other individual rights — namely, a pro-lifers choice not to support it. Furthermore, there should be nobody who vehemently and passionately supports the death of an unborn child; that is, regardless of one’s stance on whether it should be allowed, it should persist to be considered morally questionable. Even if there is a certain point where the fetus is not conscious, the fact that it has some potential to be a human makes the moral dilemma extremely vivid for some. The solution is not to shut these views down with passionate, pro-choice protests, but rather to communicate with the other side and understand their problems with your own views. The exchange of arguments and ideas is essential for human progression away from fascism. To shut down ideas with violence sows the seeds for authoritarian radical groups with vengeful motivations.