Level of Thinking

Hi!

My last three posts have been old school papers. I did this NOT just because I wanted to post, but couldn't come up with new material. I also wanted to demonstrate how my level of thinking has changed (or not) through the years. I'm still opposed to the death penalty; I'd still love to do an expatriate assignment (Thunderbird, anyone?); I still think that technology raises as many questions as it answers.

Most people who know me know I'm pro-choice. This, I don't think, is the same thing as being pro-abortion. Like President Obama, I think they should be safe and legal, but few and far between. I've read a lot about the abortion debate and spoken to many people on both sides. The problem I have is that one side wants to make it all about choice and the other wants to make it all about life. Whose choice and whose life? Whether abortion is legal or illegal isn't going to change how most people view the morality of it. Is the pro-choice side really naive enough to think that it's an easy decision just because it's legal? Is the pro-life side really naive enough to think that abortions will stop if they become illegal?

I just don't get it. Laws don't define morality. They may shape it to some extent, but recent economic events have made it painfully obvious that just because something is legal doesn't make it right. Legal or illegal, right or wrong, let's now focus on where both sides disagree. Let's focus on where both sides do and find practical ways to take steps in the right direction. To paraphrase Einstein: We can't solve problems with the same level of thinking we used to create them. Let's raise our level of thinking.

Thanks,
Matt