Closed Thread
And Perry and Republican are for more freedom? Don't make me laugh, he and Michelle Bachmann wanting to force pregnant women to undergo unnecessary procedures and force their doctors to provide narrative scripted by them to persuade women not to have an abortion.
The fact that a woman chooses to not have a child is a choice, but the Democrats act like that choice affects only the woman. That's really not true. The choice profoundly effects the developing child, who is not born. The choice affects the father who may want to keep the child but who cannot do so because the woman doesn't want to. The choice is not made in isolation. All of these are choices. In my humble opinion, if someone is not prepared for the possible eventuality of having a child, they should either not have sex, because they cannot handle the consequences of that decision, or they should use protection every single time. I know there are arguments that contraception does not work as advertised, but in the vast majority of cases, I don't believe that holds water. I think that this "choice" has to be confronted because women and men are irresponsible, not because it's inevitable.
I do think that there are good arguments for abortion. Abortion in the case of rape or incest is okay by me, because a choice wasn't made in those cases. If a woman is raped or the victim of incest, they didn't make a choice. The personal responsibility element is absent. I also think that for some, the decision to have a child or not is financial. If a woman cannot afford to raise the child, it may be better for the child not to be born, as single parenthood is the single biggest predictor of crime and poverty. These are perfectly defensible arguments to abortion that the liberals should be making, but they aren't. Instead of making these arguments, they harp on it being a woman's "choice."
I am a California voter, and I am baffled by how many times parental notification gets voted down. I think it's absolutely insane to allow your teenage child to have an abortion, which could have serious complications, both physical and psychological, and have the parents, who are legally responsible for the welfare of the child, know nothing about it. We don't let our children go to the zoo with their classmates for a field trip without a parent's permission, but we will let them have an abortion. This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I have yet to hear a single argument that is even remotely convincing as to why this is good social policy. I know there is an argument that most teens will tell their parents, and if they don't it is probably an abusive environment from which the teen needs to be protected, but that is why there is always the judicial bypass option. The argument that a teen would not be able to go to court and defend her position is ludicrous. Planned Parenthood could hook the teen up with a lawyer to defend her interests. It's not like the teen has to be flying solo in court.
Another thing that doesn't make sense to me is that a man has absolutely no say whatsoever on whether a woman should have an abortion. The child is his too, and if a woman "chooses" to have a child, the man has to support that child until he is 18, and most likely for the rest of his life. It really doesn't make logical sense to have a man have no role in the "choice" yet be saddled with the responsibility to support that child for the rest of his life while a woman can just "choose" not to have it and not have to support it at all.
Nobody makes these arguments though, not because they are illogical, because they are not, but because they are politically unpopular. Politicians need to have the courage to stand up for what is right, not for what is easy. We need a real debate about the moral, financial, and psychological costs of abortion, not one with slogans and platitudes about a woman's "choice."
As for the comment that spurned this post, I see no problem with a waiting period to have an abortion, or for the woman to be informed about the potential physical and psychological costs involved. In every other medical procedure, patients are informed of these things, and abortion should be no different. It's not about "persuading" a woman to not have an abortion. It's about informing the woman so that one of, if not the, biggest decision of her life will be well-informed, and made in view of all of the potential, and often very real, consequences.
I always like to hear different points of view, and I do respect them, so if you have a well-reasoned argument refuting the points I've made, please share it.
