Let’s try compromise

As a Social Studies teacher, I often talk with kids about controversial issues. It’s my job.

It is also my job to help students see that the “in your face” debates they see on TV and online are not how we should be discussing the many challenging issues that face us as a nation.

Whether it is guns or climate change or abortion, I ask them to see the many different positions that people hold on any particular topic.

They learn that with almost every issue, there is no black or white policy solution.

They learn to see their classmates’ perspectives and to understand that there is room for compromise.

Recently, many Republican state legislatures have passed laws that demonstrate that they have no understanding of compromise or perspective.

These extreme pieces of legislation outlaw most types of abortion, even in the case of rape or incest.

These laws fail to consider or to empathize with the devastating consequences of crimes committed against women or to allow for the medical necessity of ending a pregnancy to save a woman’s life.

These laws are wrong on every conceivable level. But they are especially wrong because they are trying to black and white an issue that is every shade of gray.

If you read Roe v. Wade you will see that the Court’s decision is full of gray. It seeks to balance the privacy rights of women with government’s right to protect the unborn. It seeks to balance the health of the woman and the health of the fetus.

The decision even defines when a fetus becomes a person and is protected by the Constitution.

You can see that the justices agonized over every word in this decision.

Since 1973, political pundits have translated Roe v. Wade to suit their political needs.

This carefully crafted document has become the Rorschach test of Supreme Court opinions: you look at it and see what you want to see.

I reject the framing of this issue as either pro-life or proabortion. Both sides value life.

To characterize women who have abortions as being against life is wrong and misguided.

It is wrong because it is impossible to look into the heart of a woman making perhaps the most difficult decision of her life.

It is misguided because who amongst us is qualified to make this judgment?

The pro-choice people I know are not pro-abortion.

They are people of conscience who believe deeply in the right of women to make private medical decisions in consultation with their doctor.

The pro-choice people I know are decent, caring people.

They are charitable people, working in their communities to help the poor or to raise money for the homeless or the less fortunate.

They value life every single day by doing good works and by living good lives.

Laws banning abortion in every circumstance are as wrongheaded as laws allowing abortion in every circumstance.

The legislatures passing such anti-abortion laws are deaf to the 67% of US voters who, in a recent CBS poll, say they still support the guidelines outlined in the Roe v. Wade decision.

Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and has been the law of the land for 46 years.

I support this decision and the premise behind it: women should control their own bodies and should make decisions about their body privately, in consultation with their physician.

I implore the Pennsylvania legislature to listen to their constituents and demonstrate to the students of Pennsylvania that discussion, compromise, and common sense is the hallmark of our state legislature – not absolutist rule.

Debra A. Ciamacca Media