Life is a constant string of contradictions.

On one hand we say, “Everyone should be entitled to his or her opinion, can’t we just get along and accept the opposing view? We don’t have to agree with it.”

And then we say, “If you support that opinion, I can no longer be your friend or buy your product.”

I say “we” because I think we all do it. This is not a right/left, conservative/liberal, republican/democrat trait—both sides do it.

Over the last few years, I’ve tried to steer clear of politics on my blog. The days of “can’t we still be friends and have different views or opinions” seem to be a thing of the past. Growing up, my mother (a lifelong Democrat) was best friends with a John Bircher Republican. Our family never attended church, while Mom’s friend regularly attended the First Christian Church. But those two women were the closest of friends, sharing laughter, vacations, and holidays over the years. 

A few days ago, I came out as pro-choice on my blog. Not surprising, one reader said she could no longer read my books, and another reader suggested she might stop reading them if I continue to express these types of opinions.

Was I annoyed at them? Did I regret making those posts? No on both counts.

I have always been a passionate proponent of free speech.  But the term free speech is a bit misleading. It is not free. I have the freedom in this country to express my views without government intervention. BUT that does not mean I can express those views on a private platform if the platform’s owner doesn’t want me there. It also doesn’t mean I can assume my readers will continue to read my works if I post something they find offensive.

I understood that. But we all must make choices. Sometimes we choose to take the easy path and say nothing, yet other times we must make a choice of our conscience that ends up offending others.

But I will confess to one thing, I am rather confused that the two negative comments I received regarding this subject were on my post about Sir Matthew Hale. That post wasn’t really about abortion, or about the pros and cons of overturning Roe Vs Wade. It was about one of the “experts” the SCOTUS majority used when making their case. 

I am still a little puzzled over that. I wonder what those two readers thought about Sir Matthew Hale. Didn’t they find anything odd about the SCOTUS using a blatant 17 Century misogynist and witch hunter to help make their case?

I just finished re-reading what I wrote, and I realize that not writing those two posts would not have kept my pro-choice (not pro-abortion) stand from my readers. Ten years ago, I wrote a short story called American Bondage, written on the “what if” premise of Roe Vs Wade being overturned.

Initially I published that book under the name of my great-grandmother, Sally Holt. She died in childbirth after having four babies, and she was just 25 years old. But later, I put my name on as the author. You can download it at Amazon for 99cents, if you are interested.

2 comments on “The New Dividing Line…

  1. Karen Marie Wright

    I stand with you and I will always like reading your books

Leave a Reply to Karen Marie Wright Cancel reply