A natural right
Roe v. Wade in retrospect
By Joshua McCracken
E-mail
Print- Share on Facebook
-
Seed Newsvine
- Text size:
The operative word here is choose; if you do not want to have an abortion, then you simply don’t have one.
I am known for some pretty extreme views in a pretty aggressive/sarcastic context. However, this one time, I doubt you will begrudge my addressing this topic in complete sincerity.
Our current president believes that, because the Bible says that all life is sacred, abortion and any results of abortion must be illegal.
This is why millions continue to suffer from horrible ailments, wishing for a cure that may never come, because that cure may first have to be found in the bodies of aborted fetuses.
To make this very simple, that decision does not fall within government jurisdiction, or the jurisdiction of any person or persons. The truth is that although many of the men who founded this government were Deists, they did not believe that the personal beliefs of the few should be used as tools of oppression to the many.
It is in the Constitution, famously referred to by George W. Bush as a “goddamned piece of paper,” that our basic ideals, a mission statement if you will, are written in the blood of those who have died to protect this country. It guarantees freedom of choice, which in turn guarantees the freedom of a woman to exercise her own jurisdiction over her own body.
It is in my opinion that this right is the birthright of all women everywhere, not just those who were born within a certain country’s borders. What few anti-abortionists seem to realize is that the very document which allows for them to petition against abortion also allows them to have it if they choose to do so.
The operative word here is choose; if you do not want to have an abortion, then you simply don’t have one. Your decision does not affect any person who is not in your immediate circle, who may not agree with your choice, and so it must be for those who feel differently than you do.
Personal feelings, regardless of their number, cannot be used to reverse this very basic right. Although this country was founded by Christians, it is not comprised solely of them, and a nation of compassion and maturity must be willing to look beyond individual religious preference to the good of the people.
Before Roe v. Wade, many women had no choice but to have these procedures performed in basements and alleyways. Today they can be done in sterile clinics, with minimum danger to the mother. Provided that the decision to do so is made with maturity and consideration of all the consequences, there is no reason for the individual woman’s decision to be called into question in the court of public opinion.
I’m aware that many of you disagree, and you have the freedom to disagree. Yet you must also consider the feelings of others. When people take their children out on the East Side during the day, they do not want them to be confronted with the images of dead babies plastered on large pieces of cardboard.
Anti-abortionists say that for all we know, the person who would cure cancer could have been among these aborted children. I say that the next Hitler is just as likely; the laws of probability work in favor of both ends of the spectrum.
Compassion and empathy are not traits that are limited to certain people born on a land mass. These traits go beyond patriotism and religion, as they are universal. Compassion for women who are about to make the hardest decision of their lives should come before any religious agenda, and the wisdom to use these fetuses to help others has the exact opposite effect that many extremists say it does: They can be used to save lives, and therefore have not been aborted in vain.
Abortion is a choice, not a rule. If you don’t like abortions, don’t have one, and do not punish those who do simply for acting on their rights – rights that are guaranteed not by government or religion, but by nature.
> Comments
The Neoconservative on Nov 07, 2007 at 05:57 PM:
"Our current president believes that, because the Bible says that all life is sacred, abortion and any results of abortion must be illegal."
Ok so basically your saying that the rule not to murder people is a relgious belief that should not be in politics? That's ridiculous, merging church and state would be far better than allowing murder on the basis that opposition to it is merely based on a relgious belief.
Adam on Nov 07, 2007 at 08:25 PM:
I couldn't agree more, since when is murder a religious issue? I guess the only real debate is when does life really begin, but liberals never want to bring this up. Maybe because the answer is pretty obvious.
Joshua McCracken on Nov 07, 2007 at 08:48 PM:
Things like rape and murder do not need to be in the Bible, any sensible person is aware that neither is right. Let me put it this way: when you can give me an exact moment that will be scientifically verified where a jumble of cells is suddenly injected with the human essence, I will reconsider these views. However let me point out that the issue here is not whether abortion should or should not be legal, the issue as I have highlighted it is that frankly, unless a good friend of yours is about to have an abortion, your opinion really shouldn't matter, just as mine shouldn't. You may feel morally outraged that a woman had an abortion, and this is perfectly fine and even admireable, however in the end the decision is not up to you. As for religious dogma, it is not anything that I would put stock in, frankly until you are willing to start having slaves (as seen is Exodus 21:20) or verses which advocate the complete genocide of any who do not believe in Christianity or Judaism (Psalms 79:6), and last but not least, that fun little verse where in Jesus tells the Jews that they are the sons of Satan because they do not believe in him (John 8:44). The bible is hardly the most reliable source to follow as a moral compass. I never once told anyone to go out and get abortions, I simply asked people to be more tolerant of those who do. If you have ever known anyone who actually went through it, believe me, it is much different when you have to look into the eyes of someone who is already heartbroken over their decision. There are better ways to be persuasive in your arguments against abortion without falling back on an archaic and very questionable book. If you know someone about to have an abortion, by all means, talk them out of it, but if that doesn't work, remember that it is not your body, it is hers, and women have spent way too many years being told what to do by men with chips on their shoulders.
Elena Pires on Nov 07, 2007 at 10:37 PM:
I do think you're right about this issue. Religion has shaped too much of recent U.S. policy. You're right, the issue isn't really whether or not abortion is right or wrong and who believes what. The issue is that our government does not have the right to force any religious views on its citizens. When our government tries to prevent abortion, marriage rights for gay people, and comprehensive sex ed, it is forcing fundamentalist Christian morality on many people who don't subscribe to it. I have a right to practice or not practice any religion I choose (unless my practicing it begins to interfere with the rights of others). I also have a right to not be forced into obeying the beliefs of others, when my hypothetical actions affect only myself.
Also, murder of a being that is capable of surviving and thriving on its own and abortion of a fertilized egg, bundle of cells, or partially formed fetus are not the same thing.
Adam on Nov 08, 2007 at 12:24 PM:
Tolerant? We should never be tolerant of something that is wrong, and we usualy aren't. We don't tolerate murder or theft. The only difference with abortion is not everyone is convinced abortion is wrong. If it is true that a baby fetus is alive before an abortion, then killing it would be murder. It's as simple as that. Babies born premature often survive. Murderers killing pregnant mothers are often tried for a double murder. I agree it is easy to look at a cluster of cells and not consider it a human life. There realy is only one key event that triggers human life. That is conception, everything after that, we are growing or dieing but always alive. However sex has been consciously dissconected from conception to the point where they seem to be two different things. (That's a whole new debate though.)
Joshua McCRacken on Nov 08, 2007 at 02:19 PM:
Sex has been disconnected from everything, including birth, it may as well be a separate entity. However I stand by the original column. The rash of abortions in this country is the making of us ourselves. We're the ones who have pushed sex into the closet, to the point where it is something to be ashamed of. We're the ones that insist of abstinence-only sex-ed in schools. We're the ones who employ teachers who aren't even sure what the hell they are talking about when it comes to safe sex (in the words of my sex ed teacher following a failed attempt to put a condom on a banana, "fuck it"). The guilty party for abortion in the first place is a lack of man to acknowledge thier own sexual desires and situations, and this shame in sex is firmly entrenched in organized religion. So, what has happened here is, religion told us sex was bad, evil, we're going to hell, and we developed a guilt complex about it. When we started to feel good about having sex again, religion told us that we are still going to hell, and that if we deal with the consequences of sex with abortion because RELIGION was so against sex in the first place that they could not even give adequate education on proper birth control, where are we left? No, I'm sorry, but if someone you know wants to have an abortion, go ahead and talk them out of it, but when it comes to public law, as long as it is insisted that a bunch of cells that are not even self aware are in fact already alive, and that moreover it is a SIN to abort them, those people have no business in policy making. Government is not religion, and this anti-abortion, anti-sex ed, anti-evolution crap is an attempt to undermine that. It may very well be a life that is dying, but no matter, because unless you know a person who is about to have an abortion, THEIR PERSONAL CHOICE IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.