The tragic murder of Dr. George Tiller has once again placed the divisive issue of abortion at the forefront of political debate. What will certainly be investigated as an act of homicide when placed in the context of the hate mongering rhetoric and vitriol of an organized movement, Dr. Tiller’s killing can only be seen as an act of domestic terrorism. Indeed the Department of Homeland Security just one month prior announced the inclusion of “hate groups” on their watch list. This begs the question: How did an armed activist with ties to militant anti-abortion groups and a record of violence get into that church in Kansas City?

President Obama is asking quite a different question. At a time when the extremists on both sides are framing the debate, a new White House Abortion Reduction Task Force is asking them if they can find some agreement. While the focus of the task force is on policies and programs that can help reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, the gathering of fierce opponents in one room to work together towards a goal is having the effect of humanizing each side toward the other according to a report by The Huffington Post. This is obviously a necessary step toward what, up to now, has been an abstract notion of “common ground”. And as the dialogue progresses one can only hope that, along with proposals for ‘counseling centers’ and contraceptive distribution, we would have the attendees tackle the difficult question of cultural values and media obsession which contribute to the rise in rates of unwed mothers and unwanted pregnancy.

In this regard the role of the media and entertainment industry cannot and should not be avoided. I believe it is time for both sides of the debate to agree that as a society and a culture we have relegated control over our sexual mores and cultural values to ‘The Marketplace’ where profit and greed are prime motivators and exploitation the modus operandi. And we have been ill served. It is clearly time to take back control of our culture and this means control of sex and violence in the television, music and motion picture industries. No, not censorship but yes, control through regulation. It is not censorship to limit the bombardment of dysfunctional images and messages impacting our children and adults for that matter, it is a survival strategy. And, I would argue that what we have now is a defacto censorship of the healthy, functional, relationship-based view of sexuality in favor of sexploitation and dysfunction. Can we find some common ground here? 

If the task force, and the nation for that matter, can address the vexing state of our societal mores and explore each side’s deeply held vision of the possible, we just might discover more common ground. This could change the frame of the debate. For instance, both sides would, I believe, attest to the emotional toll abortion takes on the hearts and souls of women. Scars can last decades and require counseling, both secular and spiritual. In the end, we must come to see abortion not as a medical procedure but more of an encounter with the mystery of life/death. Now, we are at the crux of the issue. If the pro-choice advocates stood firmly on their line in the sand at a “woman’s right to choose” but admitted that abortion was, in fact, killing, a dramatic shift would occur in the debate. The spiritual dimension would be broached and in so doing real communication with the pro-life activists could begin. In return, we would expect the anti-abortion side to admit that our wars and militarism are killing innocent women and children each and every day. If we choose to engage the spiritual dimensions of abortion we are inevitably led to the same frame with respect to war. Thus a dialogue is engaged that would not be possible if the abortion debate remained polarized. The results of such a scenario could be far reaching. We could begin the journey of healing America and turn from polarization and fear toward mutual respect and growth or from a dysfunctional body politic to a working democracy. If you think this is a naïve ‘pie in the sky’ notion, one may look no further than the Billions of dollars spent by Rightist groups and media dispensing divisive rhetoric and outright fear and hate-mongering in largely successful efforts to maintain a polarized electorate. The Neo-conservative, rightwing movement knows instinctively that mutual respect for differing opinions and unity over common ground values spells their doom.

And abortion is the mother of all divisive issues. This, I believe, is understood by Melody Barnes and her leadership team at the Abortion Reduction Task Force. Finding common ground here will dramatically shift the political landscape. I believe the initial steps toward real dialogue must come from the pro-choice camp in the manner outlined by Naomi Wolf in her 1995 essay “Our Bodies, Our Lives”. Ms. Wolf wrote that the pro-choice groups should, “…contextualize the fight to defend abortion rights within a moral framework that admits that the death of the fetus is a real death; that there are degrees of culpability, judgment and responsibility in the decision to abort a pregnancy; that the best understanding of feminism involves holding women as well as men to the responsibilities that are inseparable from their rights;..” The Obama administration has created the opportunity to take bold action. The choice is ours.