But the pro-life position, whether or not it is based on religious orthodoxy, is more ethically highly evolved than my own tenet of unconstrained access to abortion on demand. My argument (as in my first book, "Sexual Personae,") has always been that nature has a master plan pushing every species toward procreation and that it is our right and even obligation as rational human beings to defy nature's fascism. Nature herself is a mass murderer, making casual, cruel experiments and condemning 10,000 to die so that one more fit will live and thrive.
Interesting that she sees nature as being fascistic. Is it not humans being created in the image of God that thwart, what Christians see as nature broken or gone awry? When we see disease, do we not try to heal? When we see catastrophe approaching, do we not try to stave it off or find protection for those in harms way? When humans do not do these things, don't we sense that something has gone very wrong with their humanity?
Hence I have always frankly admitted that abortion is murder, the extermination of the powerless by the powerful. Liberals for the most part have shrunk from facing the ethical consequences of their embrace of abortion, which results in the annihilation of concrete individuals and not just clumps of insensate tissue. The state in my view has no authority whatever to intervene in the biological processes of any woman's body, which nature has implanted there before birth and hence before that woman's entrance into society and citizenship.
While I most strongly disagree with Ms. Paglia in her support of abortion, I appreciate her honesty. There is nothing much more frustrating to me than listening to someone speak as though abortion is the morally superior choice. There is nothing moral about that choice. It is a tragedy for all involved.
There are many pro-life groups out there if you'd like to learn more.
Feminists for Life
Libertarians for Life
Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League
Priests for Life