There are many things I'd like to say in response to Diana Ronald-Szabo [“Call Abortion What It Is: Murder,” Feb. 9 Xpress] and those who share her myopic and oppressive views regarding a person's right to choose when or if they will bear a child. Really, though, the last thing we need is a public rehashing of the same old ideological arguments surrounding this issue. So I'd like to focus on my own personal experience with choice, and leave it at that.
I have known ever since I can remember that I wanted children, and I have always had high expectations for the quality of parent I would one day be. I now have a toddler who is healthy, happy and has everything he needs. He doesn't have to worry about access to food and shelter, or safety from abuse and neglect — these things are a birthright in his world. He knows that he is loved and wanted, and he moves through life with a confidence and security that blows my mind at times. He has and is all of these things because, before he was born, I had not only the right, but the ability and support I needed to make my own reproductive choices.
Becoming a mother has only further solidified my belief that every person should have agency over their fertility and parenting decisions. I have heard people say that sometimes choosing abortion is a parenting decision — whether it is the decision to put your resources toward the children you already have or the decision to wait so that you can one day be the quality of parent you always wanted to be.
March 10 was the National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers. On behalf of my son, and myself, I'd like to thank the doctor, staff and volunteers at Femcare, our local clinic, for working so hard to give people and families like ours the opportunity to make these choices.
— Erika Harrison
Asheville
It’s chilling that there is a holiday to recognize these people. At the very least, the abortion community owes the current situation some reverence, some sense of at least being conflicted with the gravity and senselessness of this act.
Really, though, the last thing we need is a public rehashing of the same old ideological arguments surrounding this issue.
Really? Is that the LAST thing we need? Because without “rehashing the same old ideological arguments surrounding the issue”, it will never change. Without that sort of rigorous evaluation and CONSTANT reevaluation of “this issue”, lives continue to be lost every day. Without that sort of “rehashing” we’d still have laws that bar the right of women to vote and people of color to be counted as humans.
I welcome the scrutiny and the rigorous debate on “this issue” … what are abortionists afraid of?
The ‘Personhood’ Movement Is Anti-Life: Why It Matters that Rights Begin at Birth, Not Conception
http://www.seculargovernment.us/docs/a62.pdf
………………………….
“I welcome the scrutiny and the rigorous debate on “this issue” … what are abortionists afraid of?”
You are so right here ProLife. Pro-abortionists can only give you a bumper sticker talking point argument. Once they’ve put that forward, it’s often name calling from then on. Why? Because even pro-abortionists know, deep inside, that ending the life of an unborn baby is wrong.
Let us all celebrate the miracle of life and not turn our backls on the most vulnerable amongst us, the unborn unwanted baby in the womb.
Funny that you chose to use examples of people GAINING rights to illustrate your point that women should LOSE the right to choose abortion.
It the baby who would be GAINING rights, dear Eleanor. There is more than one human involved in a pregnancy.
Okay, this is so exasperating. The law stands with choice and WILL continue to do so – unless the constitution becomes nil and void and we become a theocracy. The stubborn proposal that fetuses are people puts this issue at an impass. Just because one thinks or believes something, it doesn’t mean that it is true. The anti-choicers have the burden of proof.
Wait, I made a mistake. Sorry, dads. There are (a minimum of) THREE humans involved in every pregnancy. Where is the father’s right to choose? Where is the baby’s right to choose?
(I’m clearly not advocating father-chosen abortion, just pointing out the hypocrisy of using “choice” and “democracy” and “right” so inconsistently.)
Please keep the dialogue civil. This is a very emotional subject, with very strong opinions, so it’s even more necessary that our policy be honored: Criticize the ideas, not the people. Carefully consider your comments before posting. (If you’ve posted a comment that hasn’t appeared it, that’s a sign the comment is under review or has been deleted.)
Thank goodness for the “stubborn” people who continue to advocate for the helpless. What one sees as stubbornness others see as determination, courage, fortitude. If it weren’t for the stubbornness of folks fighting AGAINST unjust laws, we would never have progressed as a society. Those stubborn women and their desire to vote furthered women’s rights even across the globe. Fighting for a cause simply because it’s legal doesn’t make much sense to me. Many, many laws are unjust.
The basis of the argument is, “when does life begin?” We all seem to agree that humans deserve rights and that life is one of them. But when is a person a person? I tend to rely on science for questions like these. I understand the biological processes of conception, and I know that no further element is missing at that point but nutrition, which all humans need until they die. So what, from a biological, scientific standpoint changes a “fetus” into a “babyh” … ? From my point of view, the joining to two elements prior unjoined makes the life. What information (scientific, please, not emotive) do you have that proves that life begins AFTER that point? If you are not able to prove that with 100% certainty, isn’t is a crime to be erring on the side of … killing a baby?