Can collectivists defend abortion rights? An emphatic no. Why? Because rights are individual, and can only be defended on individualist grounds.
Which brings me to A fight for abortion rights is a fight for democracy, published as a guest column in the New Jersey Star-Ledger by U.S. Representative Bonnie Watson Coleman and democracy activist Analilia Mejia.
Right off the bat, the title tells us that Coleman and Mejia are on the wrong premise about rights. Properly understood, rights are immune to democracy. They cannot be granted or rescinded by any vote, election, or elected representative. Rights are inalienable, or they are not rights. Looking further into the op-ed, we’ll see that the title is no aberration. From here on, all italics are mine:
What does freedom truly mean if we do not have ownership over our bodies? What democracy can we speak of?
The first sentence is spot-on, if you interpret “we” and “our '' as a collection of individuals. Individual freedom most certainly begins with ownership of one’s body. But the second sentence repudiates that critical premise, destroying the essence of what American freedom truly means.
As we look ahead to the midterm elections, our right to reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy hangs in the balance – a human right is now in the hands of individual states and lawmakers’ whims.
“Human right” is a collectivist term. Rights cannot belong to any group. The term human right infers that rights belong to the species human. But genuine rights protect the individual against the collective, be it the race, proletariat, society, or the species. Hence, individual rights. Abortion is an individual right, not a human right--and the distinction matters. But that’s not how Coleman and Mejia see it.
It’s clear that to protect and expand abortion access is to take a stand for the health and prosperity of our communities and generations to come. We are two women who think about the power of democracy often. In a functional democracy, the will of the people defines our leadership, and our laws, and reflects our collective values as a nation.
It’s clear that these two woman believe that abortion rights should be at the mercy of our communities, future generations, the power of democracy, the will of the people, and our collective values. What’s missing from this litany of collectives? The sanctity and autonomy of the individual, both mind and body.
The absurdity of defending an inalienable individual right on collectivist grounds becomes clear in the next excerpt:
When the vast majority of Americans want to safeguard our right to abortion, yet our elected leadership and the highest court in the land sides with an extreme right-wing minority and puts our health at risk, American democracy is in peril. And we must resist and fight back against this harmful agenda.
What defines “the will of the people” if not election outcomes? Yet somehow, “our elected leadership and the highest court in the land” does not represent the will of the people if it is “an extreme right-wing,” even though these right-wing elected officials are elected and Supreme Court justices are nominated and confirmed by elected representatives. The absurdity comes down to, to fight for abortion rights, we must fight for democracy by fighting against democracy!
An attack on abortion is an attack on our humanity and democracy itself.
The right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy, like all rights, is certainly part of our humanity, individually speaking. But that requires a fight against the power of democracy. The deep irony is apparently lost on these two women that Roe protected abortion rights precisely because it took abortion rights out of the realm of “the will of the people”—democracy. The Dodd decision, in overturning Roe, gave it back to democracy. If Coleman and Mejia truly cared about abortion rights, they would be fighting against the power of democracy to violate individual rights.
Make sure that you are registered to vote in the midterm elections and research your candidates to be certain they will fight for your bodily autonomy and your abortion rights. Make your voice heard to expand the Court so the most powerful lawmakers in the land reflect and protect the will of the people.
In a free society based on individual rights, rights do not depend on the most powerful lawmakers in the land nor on the will of the people. No matter how many justices you add to the Supreme Court, you will never truly protect individual rights, including abortion rights, unless the principle of the inalienability individual rights is the standard for all high court decisions. Yet not once does the word individual appear in this op-ed. You cannot fight for abortion rights and for democracy. It’s one or the other.
The American Left’s worldview is fundamentally rooted in collectivism. It cannot let go of its tribal orientation even in the face of the Conservatives’ democracy-oriented attack on abortion rights. Socialists at heart, the Left is hopelessly incapable of defending abortion rights. To do so would require abandoning collectivism, and by extension socialism that rests on the collectivist foundation.Don’t hold your breath waiting for that day.
Related Reading:
Right to Abortion vs. the "Right" to Abortion Services
In SCOTUS’ Draft Opinion Overturning Roe Abortion Ruling: Double Standards of Left and Right Exposed
Jasmine Winters Double Standard on Abortion ‘Access’ Undercuts Abortion Rights
Defending Reproductive Rights Depends Upon Upholding All Rights
America; Democracy or Republic or Both--Why it Matters
No comments:
Post a Comment