Letters to the Editor
Rachael F.
Published Letters: 153 Editor's Choice: 17
-
There is a middle ground
[Read the article: Say it, sister: "I had an abortion"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I find myself in partial agreement with many of the letters I've read, and I've only managed to get through a third of them. Here's the thing:
As with any issue that involves financial, health, moral, and religious choices (and moral and religious are NOT the same thing, especially for those of us who aren't religious in the slightest), abortion and the choice whether or not to have one is complicated. Gray. Not black and white.
I support the right to choose. In fact, I believe that sometimes, abortion is the morally correct choice - I would never choose to bring a child with a neural tube defect, Tay-Sachs, or cystic fibrosis into the world. I also feel that a developing infant IS a human life - just not one with the same value as that of a human whose life experiences have transformed her into a person. I know that distinction seems immoral to those who think all human life is the same. But you must remember, we don't all share your views, and those differences don't make us wrong and you right.
This is where it gets sticky, though. As that potential child's mother, it's still my decision whether it's appropriate to add a new life to my own, or to add a new life to the world for someone else to raise. No one else should be allowed to make that choice. Up to now, I've been making that choice by way of birth control, which, when used correctly (she said, sounding like a pharmaceuticals commercial), is very effective. Should birth control fail - when I was younger, less stable, and less financially secure, I would have had an abortion. Without hesitation, and, I think, without much regret. Now, at 33, I'd most likely continue an unexpected pregnancy and raise a child. My point? Even the same person can have different opinions on abortion at different times in her life.
However (and now I finally get to the point of the entire article) - I wouldn't proclaim to the world that I had an abortion. I'd answer honestly if asked, and my friends and family would of course know. But it's a private choice, not one that I'd wear a t-shirt proclaiming to the world. NOT out of shame, but because it's nobody's business but my own. Which is the point of being pro-choice in the first place, isn't it?
Finally, I have to agree on one specific count; I find having four abortions to be morally reprehensible, even as a non-religious, pro-choice feminist. Why, exactly, do you find it impossible to master the art of birth control? It's serial abortions like this that give the right fuel for the "abortion as birth control" part of their rhetoric.
-
Well, because
[Read the article: Say it, sister: "I had an abortion"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"The crux of the matter is why not use birth control. Not why shouldn't abortion be birth control, not is it moral or immoral, not is it safe or unsafe."
That's a major oversimplification of the issue. As has been stated MANY times, birth control, while effective, is not 100% effective. Women who are being responsible and doing their best not to become pregnant still do.
Beyond that, there are horrible genetic and developmental disorders that can afflict pregnancies that are planned. There are rape and incest. There are issues of the mother's health, where the pregnancy must be terminated in order to save the life of the mother. There are many reasons why a responsible sexually active woman might want or need an abortion.
On top of all that, the most extreme in the pro-life camp are also anti-birth control. Once they outlaw abortion, their sights are set on the Pill (because it can prevent implantation in the extremely unlikely event that ovulation and fertilization occur). Who knows what will come next? We're dealing with (in the extreme) religious zealots who believe that premarital, not-for-the-purpose-of-reproduction sex is wrong, and will do what they think is necessary to stop it.
For me, it is an issue of the slippery slope. It's one of the rare instances where I think it's a valid concern. The Pill and the ability for women to have sex with as little worry as men have always done is arguably the greatest leap forward in women's rights in the history of the nation. We shouldn't forget that the right to vote was constitutionally assured to women in this country less than 100 years ago. It hasn't been that long since we were all considered to be children, and taking away our right to decide what medical choices to make with our own bodies is the first step towards making us children again.
First they outlaw abortion, then they outlaw birth control. Then they make it illegal for you to own property. Then they take away the right to vote. Then they tell you you can't work outside the home. Then they make you wear a burka.
I sound like I'm overrreacting? Tell that to the women of Afghanistan.
-
Anyone at all surprised by this?
[Read the article: 65 pregnant teens = one canceled abstinence-only program]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I mean, other than the sheer numbers...apparently those girls get no sex ed at home, either. And...mothers between the ages of 11 and 19. ELEVEN? Oy.
Do you suppose they have a daycare center at the high school, now?