Guest columnist ashlover speaks with an authority ash cannot claim. Though his argument is based on impeccable logic, he feels at least as passionate on the subject as the fellow adoptee whom he disputes:
Enough already of the “pro-abortion” misnomer. Unless the speaker advocates forced population control (Russia), for instance, or the misguided one-couple-one-child policy, so if it’s just one, let’s have a male and eventually our culture will become extinct (China), the self-determination of a woman whether and when to have children is, properly described as pro-choice.
That said, I was intrigued by Dave Bakke‘s interview with Teresa Kettelkamp in his Wednesday column, which clarified – horror of horrors – her implied association with a pro-choice Catholic organization (thankfully a “fringe” group). On the contrary, according to Ms. Kettelkamp, adoption combined with “pro-abortion” (there goes that misleading terminology) is the epitome of hypocrisy. But here’s the problem. Although I lack the impressive credentials of Ms. Kettelkamp, as I must confess to no involvement in noble organizations promoting the well-being of those already among us, I do know something about adoption. I was adopted, and I’m here to tell her I’m the living, breathing example of a pro-choice adoptee.
As a man in my mid-40s, I was born long before the Supreme Court ruling known as Roe v. Wade. I also have no idea who my birth parents are; therefore, I have no idea why they chose not to raise me, nor, more to the point, whether they would have terminated the pregnancy that resulted in me had it been legal to do so. What I can say is, according to some religions, which are equally as valid as Christianity or any or no other religious dogma, had I not become John Wolgamot, I would have become someone else. That’s correct. The soul, which is the essence of myself, would have attached itself to the physical realm of another fertilized egg.
This description of the onset of life – suggesting, as it does, reincarnation - might sound rather mumbo-jumbo to a Western mindset. What of it? The adoption equals pro-life argument strikes me as simplistic beyond justification. Why stop at “I was adopted; ergo, I have a vested interest in no one ever choosing abortion”? Are there not many women, married or single, in circumstances both dire and merely inconvenient, who keep the children who later thank them for permitting their existence? In other words, according to Ms. Kettelkamp‘s reasoning, should not every one of us be pro-life or subject ourselves to the “hypocrisy” label, as in “Where would I be if my mother ‘chose’ not to have me?”
Reincarnation aside, the “I’m here so I can’t support abortion” philosophy is quite a selfish one. As a matter of fact, I don’t believe in reincarnation. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t occur; it simply means I don’t subscribe to it. But so what again? I have no special insight into life’s great truth, and neither does anyone else. The point is if I weren’t here, as myself or occupying another human entity, I wouldn’t know the difference, would I? Or maybe this is my one and only life. Maybe, instead of this particular life, I would be, in the language of science fiction – until it becomes reality – another corporeal being. Maybe it doesn’t matter. Maybe it’s the only thing that matters, so I am entitled to argue backward from I am here through where would I be if my mother had aborted me to the inescapable position: no one should ever terminate a pregnancy.
As I said, it’s a terribly self-serving stance. Juxtapose that sentiment with my greater interest in women controlling their own bodies and Ms. Kettelkamp’s admirable contribution to society notwithstanding, she speaks strictly for herself. That I happen to be a fellow adoptee in no way compels me to agree with her on anything in general, abortion in particular. Indeed, as the article mentioned, even some Catholics are pro-choice. Whether that’s based on the argument that what’s best for children is that there not be too many of them – in one family, on one planet – is only conjecture, as the article didn’t elucidate. While Ms. Kettelkamp is free to campaign for all life at any cost from the moment of conception, we’ll erect institutions to address the resulting overflow, I resent her labeling me a hypocrite for not adhering to her version of logic.
Am I glad I’m here? Sure. Would I trade who I am for door number three – someone else, sight unseen, take it or leave it, there’s no going back? Definitely not. As an adoptee, does my pro-choice position constitute an irreconcilable disconnect? Absolutely not.