Pro-Life
It would be nice if the
"Pro-Life" movement actually cared about life, not just about
fetuses. Instead, the movement is
actually one of the most evil things I have ever seen, and is absolutely
antithetical to actual life.
I know these are fighting
words, but I am sick of the use of the term "Pro-Life" when it is
obvious that they care nothing about actual living babies. The same people who are trying to ban
abortion are also cutting food stamps, child health care, universal preschool,
education in general and anything else that would actually help babies survive
and thrive once they are born. A true
"Pro-Life" position would mean that you wanted a baby to have the
best opportunities in life.
If you really want to reduce
abortion, several things should happen.
First, make sure that all
people have access to high quality, free medical care. This would ensure the health of both the
mother and child. The United States has one of the higher infant mortality rates in the
Industrialized World. This is due to the
economic rationing of medical care in this country. If you are rich (and probably white) you have
excellent medical care, in fact some of the best care in the world. If you are poor, your medical care is similar
to that of the developing nations.
Second, lifelong medical and
life care must be made available to disabled children. One of the most heart wrenching decisions
that middle and lower class families must make is what to do when a fetus is
found to have severe disabilities. You
can see this in the vast reduction in the number of babies born with Down
Syndrome. Parents without the financial
resources to care for a child who will need life-long assistance are frequently
choosing abortion. This is not
necessarily what they wish to do, but they must make a calculated decision
based on their resources.
As the government slashes
programs to help these parents, they frequently have no other option. A disabled child means that one, or maybe
even both parents must leave the full time workforce in order to provide child
care. Even worse is the realization that
once the parents are gone, there may be no one to care for their child. Accordingly, abortion is terrible choice that
they have no option to avoid. I have had
friends in this exact situation, and they were essentially forced to terminate
the pregnancy, not out of desire, but because they had no financial capability
to care for the child. The only other
option would be to abandon their baby to the state system, condemning it to a
life of institutions and foster care, given that very few people want to adopt
a special needs child.
In the worst case, North Dakota has banned abortions based on disability, while
simultaneously cutting all of the social programs to help the parents of a
disabled child. I'm just going to call a
spade a spade and say this is pure evil, to force a family into economic
ruination and condemn them to a life of privation.
Next, cutting Food Stamps
and other social safety net programs often forces a woman on the financial
brink to consider an abortion. Most
people do not want to bring a life into the world without the ability to care
for it, and the social safety net provides that ability. Also, I will give a hard truth: although it
is very chic for white people to adopt babies from Africa or Asia , it is not so chic for them to adopt a minority baby
from Louisiana . That is
harsh, but true.
Next, providing universal
preschool would help parents re-enter the workforce earlier, in order to be
able to provide for their children.
Then, access to high quality education would set the children up to
improve their standard of living, and rise in economic class. By limiting these opportunities, children
have few, if any, avenues to escape poverty, or even move out of the Middle
Class. In fact, it creates a generation
that has a high likelihood of falling below their parents' economic station.
Giving every child the
opportunities to succeed, guaranteeing medical care, and providing a strong
social safety net would go a long way to reducing abortion. Until the conservatives take these steps, I
will not accept the term "Pro-Life."
So what is going on? Why the massive rush to ban reproductive
choice?
It is helpful to understand
what is actually under attack. It is not
just abortion, but all freedoms of women to control their bodies that is being
legislated. Planned Parenthood, Emergency
Contraception, and even the Pill are being threatened. Everything that has given women economic
freedom is being systematically dismantled.
When women have control over
their reproduction, they have the freedom to enter the workforce, the freedom
to chose marriage or single life, and the freedom to chose to start a family on
their own terms. This is Biblically
unacceptable, and given that the most vocal anti-abortion campaigners are
Fundamentalist Christians, it begins to make sense.
Colossians 3:18 states it very clearly: "Wives, submit
yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord." A woman with reproductive freedom is in a
position to clearly control her own life.
Turning back the clock means that women are forced to make a choice,
marriage and family or the single life and a career. Further, it returns babies to the status of
punishment for sex outside of marriage.
It enforces abstinence.
So in the end, the draconian
attacks on reproductive rights become a form of social engineering, attempting
to lock women into the roles they occupied at the beginning of the 20th
century. There is no actual concern
about the lives of the unborn, because if there was, they would be instituting
other child and family friendly policies.
Since they are not, I will stick by my position that this is simply an
underhanded effort to wind back the clock on equal rights. And until they start actually promoting other
causes that are actually promoting life, please stop buying into the
"Pro-Life" term.
Call it what is,
"Anti-Woman."
And yet so many people are 'blind' to this or refuse to accept this. It is so 'their fault they are poor' and therefore 'saving the fetus' can be seen as another way to 'not be poor' if the child is 'smart' enough. GRRRR
ReplyDelete