Recently, the subject of abortion has started to percolate again as evidenced by an increase articles discussing the subject. The pro-choice camp is moving to stave off attempts to have the landmark case, Roe v. Wade, overturned. Quick fingers all point to arch villain, Speaker Boehner, cast as the evil tritagonist who is determined to burden innocent and defenseless females with the saddle of unintended pregnancy.
I don’t typically write about this subject because I agree with the right of a woman to choose what happens to her body. My agreement should not be understood to mean I’m in solidarity with all pro-choice talking points, in point of fact, much of them I find quite illogical and rather self-serving of it’s proponents.
Let me comment on one of the pro-choice articles I recently read using this passage from it as a reference point (http://www.cavalierdaily.com/2011/02/11/procedure-with-caution/)
…as men will never experience pregnancy, think they have the moral authority to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. The only person with enough understanding to make decisions governing reproduction is the individual woman, because she is the foremost moral authority when it comes to her own life.
First things first, a few quick observations on the above:
- Men will never experience pregnancy – Agreed
- “Men think” they have the moral authority to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body – Wrong, most men don’t think that at all, although I’m certain a large number still do.
- The only person with enough understanding to make decisions governing reproduction is the individual woman – Wrong, it takes two to do this dance. Men get blamed (or credited) for ‘making the decision’ on reproduction all the time.
- She is the foremost moral authority when it comes to her own life – Agreed, emphasis should be placed on “when it comes to her own life”.
It’s the lack of taking responsibility for one’s own actions that is mostly at issue. In this scenario, women get pregnant without intention to do so, then want someone, anyone, but usually the government, to pay to have it terminated, at least that is the common mantra for this type of thinking.
If we truly used the same logic (the “it’s not my fault” kind), we’d have the government pay the child support for the man’s unfortunate and unintended situation too (it may not have been his fault either!). Why does a woman get the “get out of jail free card” if she wants to terminate but a man doesn’t if she chooses to have the child?
Here’s the “800 pound gorilla in the room” question, what if the man WANTS the child but the woman doesn’t? Interesting, don’t you think? A woman would have just nine months worth of consequence if she were forced to keep the child to term so that a willing father could raise it, yet the man would be forced to have 18 years worth of consequence if SHE wanted it and he didn’t.
Where is the moral fairness in that?
One final thought,
the responsibility for Roe v. Wade being overturned will always lay at the feet of the United States Supreme Court.
Thanks for reading this far.