I read all kinds of comments from all types of points of view on the Internet. I read comments from people who consider themselves to be "pro life" and their arguments invariably rest on an ethical/moral issue. Many of these arguments are very compelling.
However, not one "pro lifer" has ever been able to articulate for me how they envision legislating their pro-life agenda.
John McCain has stated that he would be a "pro life" candidate and would pursue a "pro life" agenda.
I want to know what "pro life" legislation" looks like and how it would be implemented in our society.
How are you going to legislate forcing a woman to carry a baby in her body that she does not want? Are you going to strap her down to make sure she carries it to term?
Why should a woman be penalized for having sex with a man if the condom breaks? It's not her "fault" she got pregnant.
Are we penalizing women for having pre-marital sex?
Many of them state that this issue should be decided by the states.
Please explain WHY?
We had states' rights regarding segregation and look how well that worked out.
Why should a woman in Georgia who gets pregnant and wants an abortion be treated any differently than a woman in California?
A wealthy woman in Georgia who wants an abortion will fly to California. A poor woman will stay in Georgia and get an illegal, back-alley abortion.
Also, if we agree with McCain's assertion that life begins at conception, then millions of women who use contraception like IUDs have had abortions and did not know it.
And some interesting facts to consider...
Illegal abortions rampant in Latin America:
Lidia Casas, a lawyer and professor at Chile's Diego Portales University, in Santiago, says during the 1980s, Chile began a policy of prosecuting women. Between 250 and 300 cases go into the justice system per year, she says, and in 2001, around 50 people were convicted for having an abortion.
"It's mostly poor women who end up going to the hospitals for their complications of an illegal backstreet abortion and some of the doctors or the midwives working in the maternity wards used to report the women to the police right there," says Casas. The maximum penalty is five years in prison.
But despite such legal risks, Latin America continues to experience abortion rates that are much higher than most countries where it is legal.
There are an estimated 4 million abortions every year across the region. Up to 200,000 clandestine abortions take place in Chile every year--twice as many as in Canada, which has 100,000 a year--and Chile has half the population.
"The political elite, or the people who have money, happen to have access to abortions under optimal conditions, a doctor, a clinic, anesthesia . . . or they can even go to Miami to a clinic, so it's not an issue for them. Poor women risk their lives."
And the number of abortions tend to be higher in countries where IT IS ILLEGAL
"While it may seem paradoxical, a country's abortion rate is not closely correlated with whether abortion is legal there. For example, abortion levels are quite high in Latin American countries, where abortion is highly restricted. (In fact, 20 million of the 46 million abortions performed annually worldwide occur in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws.) At the same time, abortion rates are quite low throughout Western Europe, where the procedure is legal and widely available. Also, Eastern and Western Europe have the world's highest and lowest abortion rates, respectively, yet abortion is generally legal throughout the Continent."
...By legalizing abortion, countries can help reduce or eliminate the need for unsafe abortion. This, in turn, will significantly lessen the number of deaths related to abortion, reduce the likelihood of complications and improve women's subsequent health. For example, when Romania legalized abortion in 1990, its abortion-related mortality rate fell to one-third of its peak level—reached only one year before—of 142 deaths for every 100,000 live births.
So these "right to lifers" want to be more like Chile and Afghanistan and less like Norway?
Basically, where their logic leads us to a society where we are prosecuting women who would have illegal abortions for murder.
I don't know where the line stops because that's a legal slippery slope. Every miscarriage has to be examined... was it natural or induced?
Next step is that we'll have to start monitoring pregnancies. Is the mother putting the fetus at risk for being "murdered."
Beyond that, we'll have to have state-ordered regular pregnancy tests to ensure that someone isn't pregnant and if they are, they would need to be monitored.
Are you going to lock up all these women leading to an American Taliban?
Where does the line end? How will society work if we outlaw and criminalize abortion? Sphere: Related Content
11 comments:
Short of something like an American Taliban agenda, I do not see how they could legislate something like this. The forcing of a moral point of view on everyone else is manifestly un-Christian, so it is amazing that these folks have been whipped into a frenzy to try. I blame Rove and company, who exploit these passions for political gain.
Prolifers should legislate in such manner as to lead people to conduct that will limit the need for abortions and to respect for human beings as inappropriate targets of our aggression. That, of course, is legislating like Obama.
Why stop with the women?
If we force women to carry babies to term, let's force men to marry the women to ensure that man has to financially care for that child and be the sole responsible father.
It's amazing to me that the party that is supposed to be for LESS government is ok with government legislating our sexual lives and how we reproduce.
Pro-lifers generally talk about ending Roe v. Wade, as if this would solve the problem. But it just creates more problems. What do you do about differing state laws? You'll have people flying to New York or more liberal states, just to have abortions. Going back to 1973 will be a total mess, and it's not a solution.
I think what we need to understand is that the pro-life community sees the life of the unborn to be as important as the life of the mother. So when you talk about
"Why should a woman be penalized for having sex with a man if the condom breaks? It's not her "fault" she got pregnant.
Are we penalizing women for having pre-marital sex?"
the alternate viewpoint taken is why should the unborn child be penalized. It is not their fault either, yet in the eyes of the pro-lifers, they are being killed for this mistake.
I agree that this is a very complicated issue and it will not be solved with the simple "uphold/overturn" Roe vs. Wade mantra. However, before we can even begin to work toward a solution, both sides need to begin to understand why the other side feels the way they do, and that labeling the other as "evil" or "stupid" or "criminal" will never be part of the solution.
I was thinking about writing on this subject today, and I want to thank you for asking the question. First of all, as almost all discussions with me begin, I believe a bit of HISTORY is in order when discussing the abortion issue.
When the Supreme Court made its decision in Roe v. Wade, the court actually carefully considered Christian theology and history in making their decision. The reason abortion was leagallized to the end of the first trimester was the historic Roman Catholic and Christian belief that the Soul did not enter the fetus until the start of the second trimester. Even under Roman Catholic cannon law, aborting the fetus until the end of the first trimester was legal all the way from 800 A.D. until the late 1880's when there was a sudden and dramatic demographic decline in Roman Catholic births, particularly amoung the working and middle classes, due to more modern and safe Abortions in the newly higher tech sanitary medical age. The roman Catholic Church saw this sudden decline as a danger to its continuing power in Europe and the world and changed Church law at that time. For eleven hundred years of Christian history, abortion was considered ethical and moral in the first trimester. Abortion in the first trimester remained a more or less acceptable practice theologically in protestant circles until the revival of 1910. Abortion also became historically, naturally enough, less acceptable as more and more reliable conception control became more available.
The Supreme Court Justices in Roe were aware of this historic fact and have since written about it as a defence of their position and a statement that their position was consistant with the Historical norms of Western Society.
I personally believe that this first trimester belief was always in error. I do believe that it is impossible to tell on what day a fetus becomes a human. Obama is correct, that data is several levels above my or the presidents or the Supreme Courts pay grade. It wasn';t a flip answer, it was a humble honest answer, equal to "I don't know." Even the best philosophers and theologans will honestly look at you across the table, if the cameras are not rolling and say "I don't know."
Now a little bit of Civics:
The President does not determine who may or may not have a abortion and when. That momentous responsibility lay either with State Legislatures, the Congress and teh Supreme Court. Uh, why is this an issue in Presidential elections? Again, Obamas answer that this question is outside of his pay grade is absolutely accurate.
Now as to the question what does pro life legislation look like, I would like to change this question to what does a committed pro life activists LIFE look like? I ask this question in part because my ancestors were New England Abolitionists who believed and lived that it wasn't good enough to be intellectually against slavery, one had to take action. Now my ancestors ddi not go to New Orleans and burn down Slave Ships or Slave sales barns. They did not kill slave owners. They did not join John Brown and attempt armed insurrection. They did believe these were honest and morally available options to only be considered after all other options had been tried and failed several times. So then what did their lives look like?
Well they were devoted to ending slavery not just in America, but worldwide. They boycotted products made by slaves. They wrote endless letters and circulated endless petitions. They sought legislation designed to make the treatment of slaves more humane while they remained in bondage, they placed themselves in personal physical and financial danger by making their homes way stations on the Underground railraod. They illegally taught slaves to read, write and do mathmatics. They sacrificed to educate or apprentice freed slaves. They fought in teh American Civil War.This they did in America. They wrote letters throughout the world about the moral wrongs of slavery. Thirty years after the end of American slavery, my abolitionist New England Great Grandmother came to know my Abolitionist Scottish Great Grandfather while corresponding for their abolitionist societies about the effort to end slavery in the Belgian Congo. They worked in the Bull Moose Party for Theodore Roosevelt.
The ideas of Justice and righteousness permiated their lives to the point that they took lifelong determined action in every way possible.
So as I look at Pro Life Fundamentalist Christians, I must ask the question : What action are you taking? What has this high moral calling and standard cost YOU? Are you really serious? Allow me to examine the level of seriousness you have with some questions:
Have you placed a unwed mother in your home and cared for her physical needs while she is pregnant?
Have you given any women who are pregnant and considering an abortion the means to financially support themselves at a level you would consider acceptable?
Have you made conception control widely available for all?
When will your Church buy condoms for your local High School?
What is your churchs level of participation in Public Education issues relating to universal high quality education for all?
Have you adopted a Child whose mother had considered aborting her or him?
How many unwed mothers is your church caring for? How much housing to families in need does your church provide?
Where is your broad spectrum free medical clinic that your church provides?
Where is your church's job training program?
Where is your church's investment in affordable housing, job training, and industrial employment?
Hmmmmmm Generally even the most rabid pro life activist I find is completely disinterested in direct action that can eradicate many of the reasons that women feel they must choose to have an abortion. They also seem to be rabidly against all forms of conception control, inside or outside of marriage.
A pro life legislator would legislate for the Government to do these things since the Church of Jesus Christ has refused to take up its calling and cross and do them. Faith without works is dead. I read that in some leather covered book with golden edges once.
A pro life legislator would make free conception control universally available.
A pro Life legislator would make affordable housing and healthcare available.
A pro life legislator would have a strong economic employment policy.
A pro life legislator would repair bridges and roads and other infrastructure.
A pro life legislator would have a strong environmental protection program (uh Duh)
A pro life legislator would restore farmland and have a sustainable farming and forest policy.
A pro life legislator does not reclessly take his nation to war. War is anti life.
A pro life legislator would have a strong high quality universal education policy.
A pro life legislator would support family leave.
A pro life legislator would support state sponsored Dulahs for all mothers.
A pro life legislator would end the "war on drugs" by decriminalizing addiction and replacing prison with treatment.
A pro life legislator would tax the rich for the benefit of all society.
I find this piece enlightening, informative and brave. I believe that people should take a look at this.
Top Three things to Know Before Voting OBAMA:
(1) Obama needs to prove he is a US citizen - http://tinyurl.com/Prove-UR-US-OK
(2) Obama is not an alternative to right wing McCain
(3) Read the book "Obama the Postmodern Coup" to see he will support war and repressive social policies
Well, wrong on many counts, friendly bloogers, and right on some. First of all, yes, Pro-life legislation is a bit more difficult to define and understand than a,b, and c. So let's think: Yes, more efforts and legislation aimed at preventing unwanted and mistaken pregnancies in the first place would be Pro-Life; Laws supporting and funding more Crisis Pregnancy Centers across the U.S. and the world, much as the Christian, Fundamentalist, and Catholic Sectors have been doing for years, for the information of some of you foolish bloggers, would be great; More private, sincere Christians, Jews, Muslims, Agnostics, Athiests, and Liberals willing to take in a pregnant teen or older woman, and assist them and help them through the process, or help them adopt away the child, would be great; More laws making adoption and licensed, certified Foster care more attractive than scraping and D&C, as well as public funding and information campaigns to help young ladies see their alternative would also be great; explaining to all of our young and other people that, yes, having sex can and often does result in the union of an egg and a sperm, and thus the creation of human life, and that if you are mature enough to have sex, indiscriminately or fully informed, then you should be responsible enough to take care of the result, and not absolve yourself of the irresponsible act by scraping out the child within; O.K., more laws? Financial Incentives to doctors to encourage adoption, and adoption fares and services, would be great; Well, yes, teaching safe sex practices and better sexual education, coupled with teaching about responsibility and general cultural mores, and the financial realities of pregnancy, would be helpful; and yes, our Hollywood types and our leaders setting a better example of both when to have sex, free and easy, and how to help those who become pregnant, would be helpful. Interestingly, I think Ms. palin will have some great ideas, as she has the courage of her convictions to not 'scrape' a down-syndrome child in her own womb, for convenience sake, and to support her daughter in carrying her own child, as well. Wow, now you guys look a bit sheepish, eh? And, yes, much of the problem, third world and above, has to do with raising the level of self-respect and responsibility concerning free sex, anywhere, anytime, anyplace, baby!!!!! Oh, and Go Taliban, Live Long and prosper!!!! (Come on, morons, stop with the lame similes and alliterations already!)
Oh, and Steve, where did you get your civics degree? ACME, like Wylie CCCoyote? Come on, dude, don't start spouting a history lesson unless you really know it. When people start spouting what they think are 'historical facts', and lace them with their propagandist crap, it smells just like that, too. Some of your conlcusions are correct. I've offered to raise an unwanted child before. I've done Pro-Bono adoptions before. I've counseled women and girls wanting to have abortions before, have you? I also have a History degree, a Secondary Education degree, and a Juris Doctorate (law) degree, as well, so your not-so-sweet smelling attack on pro-lifers doesn't escape me, dude. And, buddy, if you'll agree to restrict all abortions except first trimester ones we'd be making progress, now.!! But I'll bet you even support allowing the child to be partially birthed, with the head sticking out of the womb, and then allowing the nice doctor ro suck the brains out of the head and kill the fetus, eh? Is that one your favorite, or should it be banned? Also, don't forget that the 'slave trade', and the civil war, itself, were largely ended by and caused by, respectively, Christians in England and America who believed slavery and human subjugation to be immoral. Did you forget that, or was that left out of your history books.? I didn't hear Barack the Savior mention that, or thank those radical Christian Legislators and fighters back in the 19th century for his freedom, eh? Wow, how ironic! have fun, dude.
Steve, or any of you, have you ever visted a Crisis Pregnancy Center? Or a church, for that matter, and asked what they are doing along the lines of your suggestions.? And, by the way, God Bless your great grandparents, as I would lay a few pounds on the guess that they were very sincere Christians, and that their belief in God and morality was the driving force behind their 'abolitionist' lives. And I heartily agree with you as to your conclusion that we should live our lives the same way, if we believe in something. I'll bet you support Randall Terry, eh?
Any government that can forbid abortion can also enforce abortion. Once the principle of government intervention in a woman's decision whether to have a child, the government easily can change its direction.
Post a Comment