This month: Roe v. Wade overturned, the FBI raid of Trump's Mar-a-Lago home, massive teacher shortages this fall, and the uncertain future of American-style democracy...
Hey all - I've gotten into some conversations on social media about my stance on Roe, and out of those conversations some additional thoughts have come to me that I thought would be good to share here.
When wrestling with the question of what should be the healthy societal response to abortion, how we should understand and work with it politically, I've found it helpful to imagine things on a smaller scale - to think of a group of maybe 100 people living together on a deserted island and imagine those people creating a small government where they all come together and make decisions democratically. In that scenario, it's really hard for me to imagine that it would be healthier for the community to decide by majority vote about people's personal decisions - whether a woman on the island will be allowed to terminate a pregnancy or whether someone who doesn't want to live anymore will be allowed to end their own life. Why not also have the community decide what foods they can eat and what books they can read?
The government has been set up in order to regulate the relationships between the people in the community. As Rudolf Steiner makes clear in his social writings, the "rights realm" should only deal with those decisions that affect everyone equally and that everyone has the same capacity to judge based on simply being a member of the community. This gets to the true meaning of equality in the rights realm - if we are going to base our governance system on that principle then we have to stick to it, we have to only work with those questions which we can all judge equally simply by the fact that we're all mature adults. If something requires specialized knowledge, if someone with expertise actually knows a lot more than you or me, then we're not all equals on that issue and we shouldn't all have an equal say.
So I don't think what people do in their own personal lives - in their own houses and to their own bodies - should be decided by the whole community. It shouldn't be voted on. People don't have an equal understanding of these things simply because they've reached the age of adulthood. Imagine a young man who has just become an adult having a say that was equal to the woman who wants to terminate her pregnancy. Should that really be one person, one vote?
Also, coming back to Steiner, the political realm should only deal with those things that are outer. It shouldn't be dealing with issues connected to the spirit - those depend on individual insight. With that in mind, if a woman on the island gets pregnant, stays home and aborts the fetus without anyone knowing - how does that affect the island community's outer social relationships? Do any of the relationships change? Has anyone in that community been harmed? On a spiritual level I could very well imagine that it would have an effect on the community, but should the community have any say over such things? Of course it would affect the outer relationships in that people would be sad if they heard about the abortion, or if a member of their community committed suicide, but should that be enough to allow them to step in and stop these personal actions?
Of course, I DO think the community should step in in terms of doing whatever they can to support people so they don't feel compelled to abort pregnancies or commit suicide. But this, then, describes the realms of culture (education) and economy (material support). I can't see how it makes sense for the larger community to decide and outlaw such personal decisions.
Anyways, those were some additional thoughts. I'll add more to this thread if they seem relevant. And thanks to everyone who has engaged with this very challenging question!
I'm one of the minority group with a different viewpoint on abortions. We don't apply the principle of bodily autonomy to it because the embryo is seen as a separate being, not a part of the body it's carried in. Although it's comforting to doctors and parents to say that it is just a piece of flesh and inanimate, we see it as a soul/spiritual being. Dr. Steiner said the soul enters the body far, far earlier than the time of birth, particularly if the incarnating being is an advanced soul. If you're interested, I can try to research the lectures these concepts appeared in.
Aug 13, 2022·edited Aug 13, 2022Liked by Seth Jordan
Thanks, Seth. I appreciate the perspective you bring. I spend a lot of time in Florida each year, and the issues you are addressing here are especially poignant in the Free State of Florida. So much so that I feel a physical relief when I return to New England. How to stem the tide or reverse the onslaught of these developments is a puzzle to me.
[Some more thoughts on "The end of Roe"]
Hey all - I've gotten into some conversations on social media about my stance on Roe, and out of those conversations some additional thoughts have come to me that I thought would be good to share here.
When wrestling with the question of what should be the healthy societal response to abortion, how we should understand and work with it politically, I've found it helpful to imagine things on a smaller scale - to think of a group of maybe 100 people living together on a deserted island and imagine those people creating a small government where they all come together and make decisions democratically. In that scenario, it's really hard for me to imagine that it would be healthier for the community to decide by majority vote about people's personal decisions - whether a woman on the island will be allowed to terminate a pregnancy or whether someone who doesn't want to live anymore will be allowed to end their own life. Why not also have the community decide what foods they can eat and what books they can read?
The government has been set up in order to regulate the relationships between the people in the community. As Rudolf Steiner makes clear in his social writings, the "rights realm" should only deal with those decisions that affect everyone equally and that everyone has the same capacity to judge based on simply being a member of the community. This gets to the true meaning of equality in the rights realm - if we are going to base our governance system on that principle then we have to stick to it, we have to only work with those questions which we can all judge equally simply by the fact that we're all mature adults. If something requires specialized knowledge, if someone with expertise actually knows a lot more than you or me, then we're not all equals on that issue and we shouldn't all have an equal say.
So I don't think what people do in their own personal lives - in their own houses and to their own bodies - should be decided by the whole community. It shouldn't be voted on. People don't have an equal understanding of these things simply because they've reached the age of adulthood. Imagine a young man who has just become an adult having a say that was equal to the woman who wants to terminate her pregnancy. Should that really be one person, one vote?
Also, coming back to Steiner, the political realm should only deal with those things that are outer. It shouldn't be dealing with issues connected to the spirit - those depend on individual insight. With that in mind, if a woman on the island gets pregnant, stays home and aborts the fetus without anyone knowing - how does that affect the island community's outer social relationships? Do any of the relationships change? Has anyone in that community been harmed? On a spiritual level I could very well imagine that it would have an effect on the community, but should the community have any say over such things? Of course it would affect the outer relationships in that people would be sad if they heard about the abortion, or if a member of their community committed suicide, but should that be enough to allow them to step in and stop these personal actions?
Of course, I DO think the community should step in in terms of doing whatever they can to support people so they don't feel compelled to abort pregnancies or commit suicide. But this, then, describes the realms of culture (education) and economy (material support). I can't see how it makes sense for the larger community to decide and outlaw such personal decisions.
Anyways, those were some additional thoughts. I'll add more to this thread if they seem relevant. And thanks to everyone who has engaged with this very challenging question!
Seth,
I'm one of the minority group with a different viewpoint on abortions. We don't apply the principle of bodily autonomy to it because the embryo is seen as a separate being, not a part of the body it's carried in. Although it's comforting to doctors and parents to say that it is just a piece of flesh and inanimate, we see it as a soul/spiritual being. Dr. Steiner said the soul enters the body far, far earlier than the time of birth, particularly if the incarnating being is an advanced soul. If you're interested, I can try to research the lectures these concepts appeared in.
Thanks, Seth. I appreciate the perspective you bring. I spend a lot of time in Florida each year, and the issues you are addressing here are especially poignant in the Free State of Florida. So much so that I feel a physical relief when I return to New England. How to stem the tide or reverse the onslaught of these developments is a puzzle to me.
Keep up the good work.
this was very refreshing, thank you!