Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Controversy anyone?

Warning this post conatains strong opinions.

I read in the paper yesterday the description of the Right to Life march in SF; As usual a bunch of people from outside the bay area trying to show those heathens in SF that they are out numbered.

The organizer of the march had asked that the marchers keep the gory photos home and to please tone down the rhetoric. So, the "right to lifers" are trying to appear moderate instead of like raging lunatics who in their religious fervor like to kill "killers." Maybe that comment wasn't fair. I tend to believe that, most people who would like to see abortion criminalized, really are quite peaceful and probably would be more comfortable being percieved as moderate and not lunatics.

But by wanting a complete ban on abortion does not put them in a moderate category, the moderate veiw is pro-choice. Yes, pro-choicers are the moderates. Pro-choice does not equal pro abortion or anti- child or anti life. Pro-choice means you give people the freedom to decide what is right for the situation they are in.

If Jack and Diane, who are no more than eighteen, get pregnant, Jack should do his best to support Diane while she carries the child. They should work together and make a decision that will work for them like adoption or raising the child together. Unless Jack raped Diane, or Dianes life is at risk. Then and only then should Abortion be an option. If Diane thought about getting an abortion and asked my opinion, I would tell her that I think it is a bad idea. The two women I know who have had abortions look at it as the worst thing they have ever done.

It would be great if every woman who becomes pregnant does so, when the pregnancy is desired, and if it is un-planned could make a choice that spares the life of the child. If they do decide on Abortion then they should be able to get it in a clean safe environment. And access to counseling afterward. Despite any one else's opinions.;

What makes my stance pro-choice is that I don't think my personal beleifs about abortion should become law. If you really want to end abortion, education is what is needed.


John said...

You asked for controversy? I'll stir the pot for ya Wayne.

Here's my deal. No matter how you slice it or how many caviats you put around it, abortion is baby killing. I don't care who was how old or didn't know what. Where the rubber hits the road, you're killing a baby. If you can condone murder, then so be it. people want to get on the slippery slope of "when does ther fetus become a baby" and my point is...there's isn't any defining place where one day it isn't and the next, whammo...so what gives anyone the right to make that decision. I know...the first sonogram I saw of my son made it clear for me. That was a baby, and I'd like to see anyone look me in the eye and say it wasn't.

But, but, but...nothing...you're baby killing. If you think that's someone's right, then that's where we differ.

I'm pro-choice. I think Johnny and Susie have a choice. They are free to have sex or not. That choice comes with very real consequences. Once you make that choice, you take on the perssonal responsibility that comes with it, and yeah, if you don't like the consequences, life can get nasty. That doesn't mean we wipe your personal responsibility slate clean and say, that's OK, I know you didn't mean to. We've been doing that for decades now and where has it gotten us? More babies are having babies...or getting abortions. You're right that education is the answer, but for too long what our kids have learned by example is...having sex is no big deal because if you do get pregnant, all you have to do is throw the kid in a garbage can. For too long the inmates have been running the asylum and the supposedly responsible people have been throwing up their hands in lazy defeat saying, "We can't stop them, so let's do the next best thing and kill the result."

What I find ludicrous is the double standard that comes in the outrage when a woman kills her baby right after she delivers it in a gas station rest room or whatever. What is the difference between that and the same act a month earlier? Location of the baby? Timing? What? In both instances, that baby has no chance without the care of its parents. In one, it happens to still be in the womb. There should be outrage, but in both instances.

I'm not much for labels, so I don't care much if that makes me moderate, conservative, or wacko, but nobody has ever put an argument in front of me that makes me feel good about defending anybody about to kill a baby, no matter the circumstances. I have actually tried, and I just can't swallow that one.

Wayne said...

If Abortion were outlawed the, What would happen is the number of illegal abortions go up and a lot of more women dying. Safe, legal abortions spare the life of someone who may never do it again.