Cervantes: The tired abortion debate


SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

If there is any part of the political experience that I enjoy more than any other, it is seeing two consummate professionals debate one another. There is just something about watching individuals using only their wit and the latest information to state a point and then try to out perform their adversary.

At least, that is what is supposed to happen. Sadly, I have seen many a debate turn from an educated, yet passionate, argument into a stubborn shouting match that is more akin to a playground squabble than a professional political deliberation.

Such is the case of the growing tension between Sen. and presidential candidate Rand Paul and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz. Both individuals have made headlines recently over their debate on the legality and morality of abortion. While both politicians are respected in the political sphere (Shultz serves as the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee), both gave an unremarkable debate. Paul accused Shultz of promoting the murder of fetuses, while Shultz returned the accusation, only citing ailing women as the victims.

Sound familiar? It should, since they are the same accusations that have been tossed about since the abortion issue has been around. Frankly, it is getting tired.

The year is 2015. Decades have passed since fetal termination has become an issue. There have been countless breakthroughs in the field of medicine and social reforms during the elapsed time. You’d think that after all of this time, all this technology, and all of the evolved social mindsets we would hear some type of other reasoning besides the regurgitated notes from the early to mid-1900s.

I worry over the lack of development in this debated field of sociological science. It makes me wonder if we have really developed enough to reach a state of open mindedness. It also forces me to ponder about how the future of this controversial topic. The sad thing is, I find myself caring less than I ever had.

This political deadlock is creating apathy among anyone who follows it. Just as indifference is worse than hate, apathy is worse than any other negative feelings about a governmental soft spot. At least if you hold a negative thought towards something, then you feel something. However, once apathy grabs ahold of your emotional involvement, then you simply stop caring.

Because of the lack of care, the issue grows stagnant and undesirable to mention. From that point on, it doesn’t mater anymore. People move on to a more suitable debate, one more thought-provoking and informational.

The debate over abortion is an entirely tired one. I’m not saying that it isn’t important, because it is. Nevertheless, the way it’s deliberated amongst politicos and covered by the media is absolutely shameful. It seems as if they don’t care.

If the professionals and advocates don’t care enough to express their opinions in an informative manner, the masses are doomed to ignore the issue in favor of a more interesting discussion.

In today's issue:

Privacy Policy (8/15/07) | Terms of Use (4/28/08) | Content Submission Agreement (8/23/07) | Copyright Compliance Policy (8/25/07) | RSS Terms of Use

Copyright © The Daily Iowan, All Rights Reserved.