Michael writes:
> Access to abortion is good, and so are its
medical providers. But that is not the same
as saying abortion is good.
So the argument then becomes that women should have access to something that is not viewed as a good. With respect, that makes no sense.
Either abortion is a good that women should have access to, or it is not a good and access should be denied.
> To miss that point is to ghettoize yourself
politically
To embrace that point is to castrate yourself poitically, since the simple rejoinder is: "If it is not a good, why should a person have access to it?"
> you will be squandering vital political credibility
as you do it.
What squanders credibility (politial and otherwise) is saying contradictory things and maintaining that both are true.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister