When I turned thirteen, my family up and moved from my little hometown in the US to a multicultural hotspot: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 

One of the biggest shocks for me was realizing that there are a lot of people who believe things very differently than I do. Deep down I thought most people with a logical mindset would share my opinion on controversial topics. When growing up, that was true within my friend group. We would never debate whether abortion should be legal because each of us held the same strong belief that abortion is murder. Being unaware that there were rational people with strong opinions on all sides of the spectrum, I was still living in a “bubble.”

Upon moving to Malaysia I was unexpectedly thrown off. When a common debate topic would come up, I would always try to defend my position, but it felt like I was throwing punches at shadows. In the abortion debate, I would try to counter-punch with the argument that “a baby is a human, and killing any human is murder,”  and I would be knocked to the ground with “how do you even consider that a human?” My problem was that I never understood that if you look at most arguments, deep down, they are rooted in logical premises. These core beliefs stem from one’s culture - including one’s religion, language, and history. When one enters into the issue of abortion or other similar debates, they should first try to understand the implications of culture upon their perspective and their opponent’s perspective to have a more productive debate.

Upon learning that our family was going to move to Malaysia, my parents immediately wanted us to give us a taste of the culture. With me being only 12-years-old, and my three siblings even younger, my parents started with what they knew would captivate us: videos about the customs of Malaysia, crafts about the geography of Malaysia, and samples of Malaysian food. A few days later we moved on to what we as kids labelled as the “boring” parts of culture: the national religion, language, and history of Malaysia. 

In the end, it was the “boring” elements of culture that helped us understand Malaysians better. Religion, language, and history may not be what one immediately thinks of in terms of culture, but they are often the core elements as they contribute to one’s beliefs, values, and assumptions. These premises often form the backbone or foundation of deductive arguments about controversial affairs.
In the abortion debate, different perspectives are often based on one’s religious beliefs. For Christianity and Islam, views on abortion differ due to opposing beliefs on when a baby begins to have a soul.

While Christian views can vary, most believe that ensoulment happens upon conception. This is based on an Old Testament psalm saying “I was born guilty, a sinner  when my mother conceived me” (Ps. 51:5, NRSV). Because sin is a spiritual phenomenon, the presence of sin indicates a spiritual nature and thus a soul, making a child human at conception. The point at which someone believes life begins is perhaps the most important premise of the argument for or against abortion. If a Christian believes that life begins at conception, they would consider abortions to be wrong, as it would be choosing to end a human life.

On the other hand, most Islamic scholars claim ensoulment happens 120 days after conception. This is consistent with the flexible abortion policies that most Islamic governments, such as Malaysia, maintain. In Malaysia, as long as the doctor deems that continuing the pregnancy “poses a danger to the mother's life, physical health, or mental well-being,” an abortion can occur. While Malaysia has a low abortion rate, religion has a clear impact on Malaysian abortion policies. 

In addition to religious beliefs, the language within a culture has an impact on how people view hot topics. If someone was brought up calling the being in their mom’s womb a fetus rather than a baby, they might be more inclined to accept abortion. After all, to almost any English speaker, killing a baby sounds like murder, but removing a fetus sounds like an acceptable medical procedure. The word “baby” has a helpless and innocent connotation that creates a desire to protect it. “Fetus” is a scientific term for that offspring that does not have much emotional connotation. 

In Korea, they don’t really have the option of distinguishing between babies and fetuses. The word “baby” is translated as  “아.” “Fetus” is translated as “태아” or “womb baby.” A Korean cannot refer to a fetus without acknowledging it as a baby. The argument that takes place in English about the terms isn’t even a debate in Korea. It is simply how they refer to the baby. This could lead people speaking Korean to be less supportive of killing the “태아” or “womb baby” as it is still a baby in their minds. Speaking to Korean classmates, they say that by forcing Koreans to use the word baby, the Korean language almost implies that abortion is infanticide.

While the Korean language seems to attack abortion, another cultural facet in Korea overpowers: “son preference.” Many Korean parents would prefer to have a son instead of a daughter because sons can inherit family wealth, carry on the family name, and care for them in the afterlife. This “son preference” became especially evident around 1985 when ultrasound technology was introduced to Korea. 

Once parents could discover the gender of the baby before birth, the boy to girl birth ratio spiked dramatically. In Korea, the moral argument against abortion was often overruled by the cultural desire to guarantee a male descendant.

How would an American Christian who values life at conception regardless of gender approach an argument with a Korean who values having a son over a daughter? Ideally, they would both start by explaining the cultural facets that contribute to their viewpoint and then enter into the discussion with a broader perspective. However, it is more likely that neither would strive to understand where the other is coming from, resulting in more pointless punching at shadows.

One of the best examples of considering culture in an abortion debate happened in Guam, an unincorporated territory of the United States. Roe versus Wade states that “women in the United States have a fundamental right to choose whether to have abortions.” As an American territory, Guam should be included in that decision. However, since 1990, Guam has had the strictest antiabortion laws out of all US territories. 

The debate grew from just a legal topic to a major conflict across the island with protests, public demonstrations, and various people and organizations backing different sides of the debate. What set this case apart from other conflicts was the unique way the abortion policies were defended. In court, the anti-abortion defendant called upon Guam’s culture as a main defence for the policies. He highlighted how there was no term for abortion in the local language as it was never a part of their culture. He also cited that historically Guam had never allowed abortion. In the end, the court ruled that strict antiabortion policies could remain in place.

Many people would agree that culture has an impact on one’s stance on these controversial issues but most fail to utilize culture in their argument as the defendant in Guam did. I do believe there are certainly correct answers to these controversial debates. However, just because the argument is straightforward in one person’s mind based on their set of religious values, language terms, or historical knowledge, doesn’t mean it is so evident for everyone. Should people just not engage in debates with anyone from other cultures because they do not understand each other? The increased heat in the abortion debate with the leaked Roe vs. Wade court decision makes this question even more essential.

Over the past five years, I have continued to step up to debates even though my view is oftentimes jolted. Rather than my view becoming weaker, the more it got beat down, the stronger it became. With a cultural lens, I started punching at fewer shadows. I began reaching the heart of the matter once I started to use culture to examine my opponent’s claims and support my argument.

Just like an experienced boxer begins by feeling out their opponent, the next time you start talking to your friend about a hot topic, begin by asking questions to understand the cultural facets of their viewpoint. Strive to understand the root of your opponent’s argument first. Too many people are eager to debate, but not eager to understand.