Is it possible to find a win-win solution to American’s differences in beliefs about abortion? More than any other issue Americans differ on, it seems that abortion rights gets cast in a character assessment context: People who believe what you do are good people, people who disagree are bad people. Even UU’s seem to be guilty of this, at least at times. But if we as UU’s truly want to honor our Principles, especially: ‘The inherent worth and dignity of every person’ and ‘the right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large’ it seems we can’t just take the high ground and maintain that we’re right and the other is wrong and as long as Roe v Wade remains the law of the land, we don’t have to acknowledge the value of the other’s point of view and try to find some win-win solution to US policy on abortion rights.
Is there an opportunity to reframe the debate about abortion in a nuanced but meaningful way that simultaneously addresses the interests of women and the unborn and that bridges moral and religious beliefs as well as legal rights and prohibitions? UUCSW Member Sylvia Sirignano puts on her “mediator” hat at this service to explore with you whether it is possible to combine legal freedom (right to privacy and freedom to make health care choices about our own bodies and lives) and seriousness about the moral questions? Perhaps, we can find a win-win solution, or at least take a stab at it.