The American abortion debate: culture war or normal discourse?

Virginia review of sociology Pub Date : 1995-01-01
M Dillon
{"title":"The American abortion debate: culture war or normal discourse?","authors":"M Dillon","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper investigates whether James Hunter's culture war thesis is an apt characterization of the American abortion debate. The author focuses on three arguments central to Hunter's analysis: 1) that the abortion debate involves two paradigmatically opposed world views; 2) that debate about abortion, since it involves moral discourse, is structurally different than other political debates; and 3) that the new alignments in abortion politics are culturally significant. Examining existing research in each of these three domains, the author finds that the debate over abortion is more complex than suggested by Hunter. World views of pro-life and pro-choice activists, for example, share a commitment to some overlapping values; the argumentative structure of abortion discourse has a pattern rather similar to that of political debate more generally, and new alignments on abortion, such as that between the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention, do not displace historically embedded differences in symbolic resources and cultural orientation. As suggested by the author, it may be more helpful, therefore, to think of the abortion debate as an ongoing public conversation about America's cultural tradition and how it should be variously expressed in contemporary laws and practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":85842,"journal":{"name":"Virginia review of sociology","volume":"2 ","pages":"115-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virginia review of sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper investigates whether James Hunter's culture war thesis is an apt characterization of the American abortion debate. The author focuses on three arguments central to Hunter's analysis: 1) that the abortion debate involves two paradigmatically opposed world views; 2) that debate about abortion, since it involves moral discourse, is structurally different than other political debates; and 3) that the new alignments in abortion politics are culturally significant. Examining existing research in each of these three domains, the author finds that the debate over abortion is more complex than suggested by Hunter. World views of pro-life and pro-choice activists, for example, share a commitment to some overlapping values; the argumentative structure of abortion discourse has a pattern rather similar to that of political debate more generally, and new alignments on abortion, such as that between the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention, do not displace historically embedded differences in symbolic resources and cultural orientation. As suggested by the author, it may be more helpful, therefore, to think of the abortion debate as an ongoing public conversation about America's cultural tradition and how it should be variously expressed in contemporary laws and practices.

美国堕胎辩论:文化战争还是正常话语?
本文考察了詹姆斯·亨特的文化战争理论是否恰当地描述了美国的堕胎辩论。作者着重于亨特分析的三个核心论点:1)堕胎辩论涉及两种典型对立的世界观;2)关于堕胎的辩论,由于涉及道德话语,在结构上不同于其他政治辩论;3)堕胎政治的新联盟具有重要的文化意义。在检查这三个领域的现有研究后,作者发现关于堕胎的争论比亨特所暗示的要复杂得多。例如,反堕胎和支持堕胎的积极分子的世界观都有一些重叠的价值观;堕胎话语的论证结构与更普遍的政治辩论的模式相当相似,而关于堕胎的新联盟,如天主教会和美南浸信会之间的联盟,并没有取代历史上在象征资源和文化取向方面根深蒂固的差异。因此,正如作者所建议的那样,将堕胎辩论视为一场正在进行的关于美国文化传统的公开对话,以及它应该如何在当代法律和实践中得到不同的表达,可能会更有帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信