So, my co-blogger wrote this opinion piece on the pro-life/pro-choice issue based upon whether the fetus is alive or not. Which, of course the fetus is alive. But I think the mistake is looking at the "potentiality" of this life. People say, this baby could have been a genius, a doctor, a good person, etc., etc.
But being that this baby will not be wanted by its genetic parent, the potential is actually greater that this baby will grow up to be a drug addict, drunk driver, a murderer, a bringer of misery to the rest of us on this planet.
Really. Think about it. Most people who are plagues upon the rest of us blame their parents, who didn't really want them, who saw them as burdens, who treated them like crap.
I'm not supporting abortion. I couldn't hurt a fly. Okay, I can kill a fish, but if we had no supermarkets, that's the only meat I would eat. But I think that we need an abortion policy that acknowledges what the baby is...at that moment, and gives the mom a chance to decide to go through with the pregnancy (which was a really shitty experience for me, and my baby and I almost died in child birth, thanks). That's why I say that when the fetus is more bug-like, (first trimester) abortions should be granted, no questions asked. After that, though...I personally disagree with it.
That being said, the shame factor would make mothers risk their lives with amateur abortion attempts with clothes-hangers, etc., just like they used to. I think that's the main reason that abortion was legalized in the first place. The motel help was tired of cleaning up after amateur abortion messes. And teenage girls were dying a few days later.
Maybe what we should be doing for girls who want late-term abortions is having anonymous birthing clinics. These teenaged kids could go in and give birth and these babies would be immediately put up for adoption, no questions asked.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In response to that same post from our fellow co-blogger, I tried gently to point out that the political question of choice was misframed within his argument.
ReplyDeleteI've known countless women who were active in the pro-choice movement. Some (including my mother) were pro-choice before Roe v. Wade.
Ask them, and they'll tell you that by 'choice' they mean the choice of whether or not to have an abortion (although, that would certainly be within any woman's purview). They regard fetal tissue as the mother's tissue, not as a separate, sovereign (so to speak) entity. Therefore, the 'choice' is actually the choice of controling one's own body.
From your post here, and your response, I would gather that you have a dividing line between embryonic cells belong to the mother, and when they belong to something else (i.e. when it's past bug stage).
Once again, that personal belief is certainly your right, and you have every moral, ethical and legal right (at least at the time of this posting) to act on that belief.
I do realize, however, that many women feel differently about the issue. As a male, I will never face the decision on whether or not to abort a child. The only thing that I can do is understand wherever a woman is coming from on the issue, and support her decision. For that reason, I feel that the widest possible lattitude in granting abortions is the best choice for our society.