It is one thing to be anti-abortion, but it is another to be anti-choice.
“On June 24, 2022, Kentucky began enforcing its trigger ban, which prohibits abortion at all stages of pregnancy, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,” reproductiverights.org published.
According to The Guardian, 1,572 U.S. politicians have helped ban abortion since Roe v. Wade fell in 2022, and 85% of them were men. 14 states have abortion prohibitions, 11 of which have no exceptions for rape or incest; Kentucky is one of them. In the few states that do have exceptions for rape or incest, it must be reported and proven with physical evidence.
The most known pro-life organizations such as Americans United for Life, The National Right to Life, and The Elliot Institute were all founded by men. Yet, none of these organizations look to control men’s ejaculation, which is the sole component needed to impregnate. Instead, these organizations often shame women who have had an abortion and circulate stories of those who felt guilty after “murdering their child,” only the successful adoptions, and uber-righteous religious affiliated ideologies. Advocates continue to push the adoption system as some sort of holy grail alternative while the reality is that the United States alone already has over 400,000 kids in the foster care system and 2.5 million homeless youth.
Just to put this into perspective, donating blood in the United States is completely voluntary. We do not force people to give up their own bodily autonomy to support the life of another person. However, we now force women to give up their body to a fetus, placing the unborn’s rights over the rights of the person carrying the fetus if health complications were to present them self.
Another comparison to consider is how the introduction of mandatory Covid-19 vaccinations led the country to a mistrust of the government. The push back repeatedly emphasized the fact that political figures had the authority to decide what we were to do with our own bodies and again, it is unconstitutional to force people to alter their own bodily autonomy to support the life of another person.
“Any mandate to force a person to give up use of their body or any part of their body, to sustain the life of another person would not be considered ethical or legal in any other context,” @thatsnotrightpolitics posted on Instagram.
To summarize, women are required by law to endure pregnancy, childbirth, and ultimately motherhood regardless of health or ethical concerns. The heart-breaking reality is that I, a 17-year-old girl whom is soon to be a collegiate athlete, have no access to reproductive healthcare if I were to be raped. Nor does your sister, cousin, mother, girlfriend, or daughter. It is our principled duty as child-bearing individuals to abide by the conservative concept of correctness and simply reproduce.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973): A person may choose to have an abortion until a fetus becomes viable, based on the right to privacy contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Viability means the ability to live outside the womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception. — U.S. Supreme Court Center
Terminating a potential life is a hard decision to be made, but one that women should get to make. I pray that there are women who will never face the ramifications of rape. I pray women too can make a sustainable single household income. I pray that all women can find the strength to get out of an unsafe environment. I pray that all women have access to professional help for mental health concerns. I pray that no woman feels like an abortion is their only option.
This is not about “babies” or “life,” this is about women’s rights; rights that shouldn’t be in the hands of political figures, but rather within the hearts of our people.
It is one thing to be anti-abortion, but it is another to be anti-choice.
anonymous • Mar 30, 2024 at 12:38 am
Great job. I would like to add that Kate Cox, a Texas woman with a life-threatening pregnancy, was forced to leave the state to abort a child that had a small chance of surviving. Samantha Casiano was forced to deliver a baby that died hours later. Amanda Zurawski went into septic shock after being refused an abortion. Lauren Miller had to travel across state lines to save her own life. A woman might die before these nuance-lacking abortion laws are fixed.
Also, I was surprised to see that there was no mentioning of how often unsafe, illegal abortions happen when safe abortions are banned.
If I’m being nitpicky, the aforementioned topics should have been included in this piece because they are easier to digest than the murky, abstract concept of bodily autonomy, which people have hotly debated for decades and made no progress in doing so.
This article is carefully crafted, however, I don’t think a quote from an Instagram post or a statistic from the notoriously left-leaning Guardian (I would have gone for AP news, which prides itself on being unbiased) will convince the other side of the pro-choice cause. One must always consider the opposing viewpoints when persuading, and the Central Times’ political articles would be even more impressive if they were looked over by multiple dissenters before publication.
Overall, this article was a really brave venture into the most sensitive topic in our time, and I’m eager to see what response it receives. I hope the Central Times continues to write political articles if that is what the students want, but all of those pieces need special care, either at the level of detail of this one or even more. As with all of the contentious topics of our time, I try to stay as informed and compassionate as possible. Again, great job.