|
...and I really appreciated that he admitted to being shaken by some of the stories of late term abortions that women shared with him; however, it is troubling to say the least that he still says he is "against abortion".
Here's the thing: Nature, or God, or whatever you want to call it / Him / Her -- does abortions. That is essentially what miscarriages are, naturally-occurring abortions. Now add to that the harrowing stories of women who WILL die if they go through with their pregnancy; or who WILL give birth to babies without brains, or with giant heads filled with fluid -- what the hell are they supposed to do, just die because someone's theory is that "abortion is wrong"???
I'm fine with people wishing that abortions will be rare. I am not at all fine with people thinking their lovely little theoretical positions should in any way affect what choices women have when faced with their own reproductive choices. I am not fine with people who think they can dictate what reasons are acceptable, and what reasons are not acceptable to have an abortion. It's like other legal rights: either everyone has them, or no one really has them. Same for abortions, either any woman can choose to have one, or we will end up where even the most dire of cases are denied the ability to have a life-saving procedure.
When will people just realize that the beginning of life is fraught with hazards, that babies can be deformed, brainless, all sorts of things that yes, sound ugly but what the devil are we supposed to do, just die? Just carry the baby "to term" no matter what -- even when the baby is dead? What the hell is wrong with people? We seem to have lost all ability to reason about the realities of life, we live in some cocoon of unreality where life is neat and fits into nice little theoretical boxes and someone can say in all seriousness that they are "against abortion" even in the face of stories that they themselves acknowledge are enough to shake them to their core.
Mr. Sullivan ought to examine himself a little more closely, and ask himself why he was "shaken". He ought to really meditate, put himself in the shoes of a woman whose baby inside her is dead, or brainless, or will kill her if she carries it to term. He ought to ask himself if there are tradeoffs in real life, or if it's all just a nice little game of rules where, if you happen to have drawn the wrong cards, well tough cookies, you're dead. Or physically or emotionally devastated for life. Or you bring a child into the world who is so debilitated that they will be in an institution, never able to function properly nor to really be fully human.
I understand the counter arguments, that if it's "allowed", then women will choose it for the "wrong" reasons. That some of those potential babies could, possibly, have had meaningful lives. And this of course is true, some women will have abortions for reasons that others disagree with, and some of the unborn babies could potentially have had meaningful lives. But that is not for us to decide, it is for the woman to make the judgment and it is up to the rest of us to butt the hell out when someone has to make this most agonizing of decisions for herself.
|