Joe Strupp's Editor & Publisher article "South Dakota's Top Paper Refuses To Editorialize On Abortion Ban" addresses one of the most pervasive myths about abortion. Namely, that no EVER changes their mind about this divisive issue.
[http://www.editorandpublisher.com/...]
Although the biggest abortion rights story in 33 years is taking place in its own backyard, South Dakota's largest newspaper will not editorialize on the controversial statewide abortion ban just recently approved by its legislature.
"Part of it was that we wouldn't change people's minds, and part of it, regardless of which side we came down on this, is that people would read into it things that are not true," Chuck Baldwin, editorial page editor of the Argus Leader in Sioux Falls, S.D., told E&P.
"Abortion is different from other issues," he replied. "It is a hot-button issue at the core of everyone's soul. It will not change no matter what."
My god, what a thought. That a newspaper might assert that a democratic nation and its citizens are beyond reasoned discourse and rational persuasion...
Not that one person's conversion could undermine this steely logic, but I am one such person. Having been raised by a theoretically devout Irish Catholic and steeped in years of pro-life rhetoric, I was stridently anti-choice. This perspective was somehow reconciled with my other extremely left wing views, under the banner of respect and advocacy for human kind. But after 2 years of university education, with a major in political science and a minor in philosophy, my opinions began to change. A little bit of history, a bit of political theory, the solitary combo lecture on gender/race/ability issues in every poli sci or soc or econ course, some metaphysics, and...oh my...doubt was sown. And that doubt was really all that was required to see the justice of choice.
I was wrong and I grew accustomed to admitting that I had been wrong. Try that sometime, it's quite liberating. Every liberal should.
Like most of us, I cannot believe how ignorant and naive I was as a young person. Awareness of the complexity of life and meaning has undermined my moral certainty about most things.
Back to South Dakota and the Argus Leader...
Yes, the debate is fucking ugly. It is undeniable that discussions of choice and abortion are often marked by extreme emotion, entrenched positions and reference to largely indefensible value judgments. People get mad or indignant or offended, they talk but don't listen, they shout down or shut down, shy away, hurl insults or epithets and guard the righteousness of their position.
But sometimes they don't and a dialogue between individuals occurs and the possibility of alternative ideas is considered. I assert that the legitimacy and power of reasoned discourse and rational persuasion is the ultimate foundation of democracy and that people DO CHANGE THEIR MINDS.
Young people, who are beginning to experience that inevitable cognitive dissonance between received and realized wisdom, change their mind. Individuals who find the structures or institutions in their life suddenly or gradually limiting or misrepresentative or shockingly wrong change their mind. It's so bloody fundamental; I can't believe it needs to be defended. People change their minds about many, many things in this life. Including abortion.
The freedom to change one's beliefs is inherent in freedom of belief. And for the Argus Leader to assert that this change does not occur and consequently remain wholly silent on this issue is indefensible.