Is a Balanced View Possible on Amendment 1 in Tennessee?

Here in Tennessee, an important piece of legislation is about to be passed or rejected. And it’s a hot topic.

The more I speak with my fellow Tennesseans about Amendment 1, and for that matter the challenging personal and social issues surrounding abortion rights, the more I realize people who are able to see an issue from multiple angles are being forced into the woods.

I can’t blame people for not wanting to discuss an issue that invites the polarized minorities to shout from their trenches about a woman’s self-determination over her body, or a child’s right to continue to experience life. But as this issue, along with so many other political dynamics in an age where media drama trumps an objective attempt to inform the public, becomes more and more polarized, it’s important for us to understand Amendment 1 is not so simple as to be represented by two sides.

During Obama’s first Presidential campaign:

I hit the road on his behalf.

As a bestselling Christian author, I spoke to churches and Christian schools about the President’s plan to reduce the number of abortions that took place in America. I campaigned in each state where the polls were close and we ended up winning all those states.

But it came at a cost. I was attacked ferociously by, perhaps, well-meaning evangelicals who’d bought into the end-of-the world drama. It was an interesting time in my life. I grieved for the loss of objective, reasonable thought in the new digital age of shouting at each other in 140 characters.

Looking back, I was misguided on two fronts.

The first was in thinking Christians wanted to reduce abortions or would consider a reduction rather than a legislative ban. While some were interested, in droves, they didn’t. The mass had a simple view of the issue and wanted abortion to be illegal. This would of course create dynamics they seemed unaware of or unconcerned about. The quality of a mother’s life, not to mention the quality of a child’s life.

While I’d agree the opportunity to life supersedes concerns about whether or not those lives may or may not be as enjoyable as yours and mine, I was still naive to think most evangelicals had even considered the complication of the issue or had sympathy. To them, abortion was an ace card, an opportunity to speak as a humanitarian without engaging the root issues of poverty, family dysfunction or the extreme terror an expecting mother in a challenging circumstance experiences.

I was naive in the other direction too.

The loudest of abortion proponents (albeit the minority) were unwilling to consider, even hypothetically, that abortion involves two lives rather than one. Their concerns rightly involved a woman being forced to live a life she didn’t want to live, and that at the hands of what seemed to be a bunch of white, Republican men.

The fury is understandable. Why should anybody have the right to tell somebody else what they can do with their body? Unless, of course, that body holds another life. It’s sad to me then that this issue has become so polarized and charged that we can no longer have a reasonable conversation filled with understanding and sympathy for all parties involved.

It’s into this social dynamic we are asked to make a decision on Amendment 1. While much spin has been cast around the Amendment, it is a remarkably reasonable piece of legislation that restores the constitution of Tennessee to a neutral stance on abortion by eliminating a right to abortion as a sort of “protected class” as it has been defined by the Tennessee supreme court.

It makes no actual restrictions on abortion.

It simply gives power back to the legislature and, as such, the desires of the people of Tennessee. In my opinion this is a powerful piece of compromise. Removed from the often unfounded fear of the slippery slope, Amendment 1 simply catches Tennessee up with the caution proposed and carried out by border states.

Do conservatives need to do more to understand the complexity of the issue, and specifically the financial, social and familial dynamics that lead to unintended pregnancies? Yes, they do. Do they need more compassion for expectant mothers? Yes.

And yet on the other side those who only see the expectant mother and furiously defend her rights without considering an even more vulnerable life at stake have considerations to make of their own. We all have work to do if there will be progress, but I do not believe Amendment 1 is too radical to contribute to that progress. I think my conservative friends have brought something good to the table, and I’m for it.

Is a Balanced View Possible on Amendment 1 in Tennessee? is a post from: Storyline Blog