A young woman sat with her arms crossed
and lips pursed while shooting me a look that must have been intended
to vaporize me on the spot. I was talking to her and some of her
fellow students about abortion and the pro-life position, and it
clearly made her unhappy. She finally raised her hand and the whole
room seemed to gird their loins for what was about to come. I asked
her, “Did you have a question or comment?”
She rather forcefully said, “I am
offended that you would come here and say these things.”
My response was as follows:
Ok, let's talk about that for minute. I
have presented an argument in support of the position that abortion
is objectively wrong because it unjustly takes the life of an
innocent human being. The lines of evidences that I appealed to were
scientific (the identity of the unborn as a human life from
fertilization) and philosophical (human beings have value by virtue
of what they are not what they can do or how I feel about them).
I also understand that hearing people
argue for views you disagree with can be unpleasant. It bothers you
to hear someone say you are wrong, just like it bothers anyone
including me. I can get really irritated over people disagreeing with
me about trivial things. It is natural to have emotional responses to
discussions about all sorts of things, but especially about something
as objectively important as abortion.
Anytime someone disagrees with us and
offers arguments for their position there are only a few options open
to us in response. (1) We can quietly listen, consider their views,
weigh the counter arguments, and decide they were wrong. (2) We can
listen, consider, weigh, then decide we are wrong and adjust our
beliefs appropriately. (3) We can listen, consider, weigh, and then
decide that we simply lack sufficient information to come down on one
side or the other. (4) We can offer counter arguments on the spot
addressing the specific lines of evidence offered.
All of those are perfectly appropriate.
There are certainly counter arguments to everything that I have said
today offered by genuinely brilliant people at an academic and
sophisticated level. I've read them and learned from them, though I
obviously found them less than persuasive in the end. I encourage you
to find and read them and would be happy to point you in the right
direction.
But when you say that you are offended,
all that you are doing is telling us how you are emotionally
responding to what I am saying. I already conceded that we all
struggle with our emotions in this kind of conversation, both in my
original talk and just a moment ago, so you aren't adding anything to
the discussion that addresses the substance of what was argued.
Finally, and I'm not saying you are
doing this, but when some people say they are offended what they are
really saying is that I'm upsetting them so I ought to stop talking
about abortion. I reject that all together. No one has a right not to
be offended. Sometimes there are questions of such importance that we
are compelled to engage in public discussion knowing that it will be
upsetting to do so. Imagine how you would feel if someone suggested that
you shouldn't be allowed to argue for positions with which they disagree simply because they are incapable of controlling their emotions.
Succinctly and wonderfully said!
ReplyDeleteWell Said. I'm sure I'll borrow some of what you said here in my conversations.
ReplyDeleteI like that you try to bring a heated debate down to the world of rational thinking and arguments. Although I think arguing takes energy and sometimes people want to relax and enjoy themselves instead of compete in a public debate about controversial topics. I don't think we're compelled to discuss things because they are difficult morally or socially. I think it's wise and respectful to choose the venue. Someone who says they are offended may just be trying to express it's not the desired venue.
ReplyDeleteMaturity in my book is defined as the ability of someone to control their emotions and think rationally during times of stress. Not everyone has the maturity to discuss such topics, nor do some people present any arguments outside of personal religious beliefs. Which leads most conversations to agree to disagree and walk away. A no progress solution and stigmatizes the topic as religious in nature and not moral or social.
Very nicely put--thank you!
ReplyDeleteHey Frank,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. I agree that there are proper venues for conversations. In this particular situation, I was an invited speaker who was meeting with an ethics class after a larger presentation. When I was at work in a more normal office in environment, I never interrupted the work day of others to force an uncomfortable discussion.
As to whether we are compelled to address certain issues, I would argue that abortion is of such objective importance that is must be addressed. We cannot choose to not engage for fear of offense. If the unborn are not human or proper objects of our moral duties, then pro-life efforts represent an unconscionable interference in the free choices of women and the political process of our nation. If the unborn are full members of the human family, then abortion is the unjust destruction of human life on an unimaginable scale. We must sort it out one way or another. There is no calculation by which it is of no importance.
We must do so respectfully, which speaks to your recognition that there are proper times to have this talk. But we must do it. That is what I meant.
Thanks again.
Jay
Isn't being offended a choice?
ReplyDeleteThere is that pesky word "choice."
:)
She chose to "take offense" over what she heard.
Mr Watts is 100% correct. When a Human female is impregnated by a human male the ONLY result possible is the creation (assuming fertilization occurs) of another HUMAN Life.
ReplyDeleteThe taking of innocent human life is simply wrong. Wise up radical Lefties.
It seems to me that if somebody says they are offended by what I say, and I respond by explaining to them why they are offended, why they shouldn't be, or how the whole subject of offense is irrelevant, I just risk offending them even more. It seems to me a better response is to simply ask them why they are offended. Then you can reason with them without coming across quite so presumptuously.
ReplyDelete