Abortion is a thorny issue, particularly in the West where it often comes into conflict with Christian doctrine. However, individual nations have dealt with the matter in different ways. Canada, the United States and most of Western Europe have made the procedure available on demand to any woman who wants one for whatever reason. On the other hand, abortion is illegal in the majority of Latin American countries, though one — Cuba — permits it in all cases, and other jurisdictions, like some Mexican states, allow it in extreme circumstances such as when the pregnancy is caused by rape.

I myself am pro-choice. That is, I believe every woman should have the legal right to an abortion no matter what her reason. I do have moral reservations about the operation, but I would never foist my beliefs on any other woman. Nonetheless, much of the organized pro-choice movement leaves me cold. At times there seems to be as much intolerance in the pro-choice camp as on the pro-life side. It enrages certain pro-choice activists, for example, that most people consider an abortion more morally ambiguous than a tonsillectomy. Women who would not choose the procedure for themselves but who would not deny that right to others are frequently vilified. Not content with the fact that over half of all Americans accept abortion as a legal option, some pro-choice leaders are demanding that it be seen as a moral one too. A website set up by the Feminist Women’s Health Center describes the view that one can support legal abortion yet reject it for oneself as “self-righteous baloney.” Statements like this make pro-choicers look less like rational adults and more like spoiled children who are allowed to eat cookies before dinner but who whine because they can’t have the whole jar.

While considerable ambivalence exists around abortion in the United States, the procedure has been legal in that country for almost three decades and is unlikely to be banned in the near future. This contrasts with the situation in Latin America. Most people there are not only personally against abortion (as are some Americans and Europeans) but opposed to legalizing it as well, at least on an “on demand” basis. They might be more “pro-choice” in exceptional circumstances. According to one survey in Nicaragua, most respondents accepted the procedure when the woman had AIDS, and almost half felt the same way when the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest. But this and other polls from countries such as Chile and Colombia show that the majority of Latin Americans reject abortion in so-called “soft” cases (for instance when the woman already has too many children or when she doesn’t feel ready to be a mother), which are by far the most common reasons why women seek to end their pregnancies.

The results of these polls are even more striking in light of the fact that Latin Americans are not a particularly conservative bunch. Support for out-of-wedlock childbearing, for example, is high in these countries. (As an anecdotal aside, the mother of my Nicaraguan ex-boyfriend, a religious Catholic woman who abhorred abortion, was anxious for him and me to provide her with a grandchild, even if we weren’t planning marriage.) One Gallup poll found that 87% of Colombians approved of unmarried couples having children. This percentage was surpassed only by that in liberal European nations such as Iceland. It ranked well above the 50% figure for the United States, which makes me think that despite Latin Americans’ somewhat iffy “Western” status, they are perhaps more like Europeans — the original Westerners — than Americans are.

A glance at abortion in Latin America upsets a number of pro-choice clichés about the pro-life movement. One liberal Christian website claims nations that forbid abortion persist in the “barbaric practice of capital punishment.” That’s not true of Latin America, however. There most countries ban both executions and abortion. In fact, in voting to eliminate capital punishment in Chile recently, several legislators based their decision on their respect for all life — a stance that led them to oppose abortion as well. And irony of ironies, the one Latin American nation that permits abortion in all instances, Cuba, makes fairly liberal use of the death penalty.

Latin Americans’ widespread opposition to abortion likewise challenges the claim that pro-life sentiment is the exclusive domain of rich white males. One of most common accusations against pro-lifers is that they are racist (“racist, sexist, anti-gay” is a frequent chant at abortion rights demonstrations). Obviously racism exists in the anti-abortion rank and file, as it does elsewhere. But pro-choice activists are often more than willing to ignore the bigots in their own midst. For instance, biologist Garrett Hardin, whose book Mandatory Motherhood made him the darling of the abortion rights movement, frequently speaks against non-white immigration to the United States. Even more difficult for some pro-choicers to face is the realization that non-whites may not be so interested in the abortion on demand package. The fact that the majority of Latin Americans don’t accept abortion as a legal, much less a moral, option conflicts with the view of the pro-life/pro-choice battle as a white versus non-white issue.

With all my misgivings about the organized pro-choice movement, I still support legal abortion. Pro-choice advocates, like Silvana Paternostro, author of the book In the Land of God and Man (which I reviewed in a previous essay), also make the very logical point that individuals and organizations who want to stop abortion, like the Catholic Church, should try to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies through reliable birth control. Yet the Church remains staunchly opposed to any sort of “artificial” contraception.

I’m less than impressed by some pro-choice proponents’ tendency to sidestep the moral questions surrounding abortion. Paternostro, for example, seems intent on attacking anyone who expresses the least bit of moral discomfort about terminating a pregnancy. Former Colombian presidential candidate Noemí Sanín is described as “pro-life” (a four-letter word in Paternostro’s vocabulary) for saying that “abortion should not be penalized by law or with prison: the woman who aborts suffers so much that it is punishment enough.” Coming from a country where women can be jailed for ending unwanted pregnancies, Sanin’s remarks might be perceived as a step in the right direction as far as achieving pro-choice goals goes. But to Paternostro, Sanín is just another cog in the patriarchal wheel. The author similarly assails a Marxist professor for stating that he is personally against abortion. Though reproductive rights advocates make the valid claim that society should tolerate their views and their choices, when it comes to others’ opinions their much-cherished tolerance sometimes flies out the window.

Whether abortion will be legalized or not in Latin America remains to be seen. I think it would be best if it were. Women should be free to follow their consciences on matters such as terminating a pregnancy. I would also agree with pro-choice advocates that many so-called “pro-lifers” are less concerned with “saving babies” than with controlling women. But the pro-choice movement would have more credibility, in my view, if it acknowledged and accepted that many people, even if they support the legality of the procedure, don’t put the act of terminating a pregnancy on the same level as pulling a tooth.