Challenge your moral convictions | Isabel Stabile

I have been reflecting on why some Maltese anti-choice persons publish such unpleasant, if not actually hateful posts, on social media.

Conventional wisdom is that we are highly religious as a nation and that since we believe that life begins at conception, we cannot but also believe that abortion is always morally wrong. While I disagree on the issue of when life begins, what I do not understand is how it is possible for some of those with such strong religious views to engage in offensive posts in respect of people like myself and my pro-choice colleagues.

Based on my reading about the psychology of moral convictions I have come to the conclusion that strong but unchallenged moral convictions are not necessarily a good thing. Morals are the basic rules of interpersonal conduct that we believe everyone ought to follow, such as for example, not physically harming anyone unless there is extreme provocation. Moral conviction therefore is the subjective belief that something is fundamentally right or wrong, i.e., either moral or immoral. Most of us think of moral convictions as a good thing. For example, we have libraries and social security benefits because those who came before us acted upon their moral convictions about the importance of education and the wellbeing of society.

There is evidence that people generally believe that their moral convictions are objectively correct. So, for example, for those who are anti-choice on abortion, the idea that abortion is wrong is as obvious to them as one plus one equals two. They do not need an expert to explain this, and indeed would question any authority trying to convince them otherwise. The common message in all anti-choice online posts, comments and letters to the newspapers is “Why can’t the pro-choice people see what is so obvious (i.e., that abortion is evil)?” In other words, they perceive the immorality of abortion to be a fact when actually it is a matter of their subjective state of mind and what they attach moral significance to.

Research shows that people do not trust authorities to get it right when they have strong moral convictions about the possible outcomes. This explains why most gynaecologists on the island follow international guidelines when it comes to the management of all medical conditions except abortion. It makes no sense, until you realise that these experienced doctors have strong moral convictions that interfere with their clinical judgement.

Moral convictions have this intuitive power that makes them feel as if they must be true, in other words they feel self-evidently true. It feels obvious to them that the correct outcome is their position. It follows that anyone who holds the opposite view must be wrong. Here I must clarify that my personal moral view is that women should be given the choice of whether to have an abortion or not. Other pro-choice activists may have different views, but for me the important moral point is the choice, not the actual abortion.

Moral convictions involve subjective states of mind, which is why you can be morally offended by something that I find unobjectionable. Unfortunately, when we are in the grip of our moral convictions, we tend to forget that what we are experiencing is actually subjective. Our convictions feel objectively true, very much like saying that the earth is round. Moreover, this illusion of objectivity leads to the false conclusion that what you experience as morally correct cannot just be true for you, but it must be true for me too.

Research in fact shows that we tend to believe our moral convictions are not only true for us and our circumstances, but also for everyone, everywhere and at all times. So those who believe that abortion is morally wrong will also believe that it was morally wrong 100 years ago, and that it is not only wrong in Malta but also everywhere else.

Unfortunately, most people have not done enough independent research to back up their strong moral convictions. They are sadly uninformed. The feeling that one already knows everything that one needs to know is based on a strong emotional reaction to the topic rather than any facts. It would seem that once the moral conviction has developed, a bias kicks-in that pushes us to collect information that supports our conviction rather than challenge it.

Rather than hitting out because you disagree with me, let us try to understand each other’s moral views. As a doctor for choice, I believe that women have the right to choose what happens to their body, and that includes abortion.

You have every right to disagree with me, but what I ask you to do is to please look at this issue from a different angle. Do so with curiosity and an open mind. Look for the evidence. Read something that challenges your belief that abortion is always morally wrong.  Reflect on the pros and cons. You might just realise that you have reached your conclusions without needing much by way of evidence. You might realise that the strength of your feelings is not enough to convince you that what you are feeling is true. You might just learn something about yourself.