In lieu of recent weeks regarding the approval of the H.R. 36, Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act, which makes killing fetus’ after 20 weeks illegal – due to the fetus feeling pain. I would like to defend the right for women to have abortions on fundamental objective terms.
But before I start, I would like to say, if we are going to start passing bills because things “feel pain” then why not allow women to have abortions because they feel slight discomfort?
It’s ridiculous to push any law under those terms. . .
The problem here is that the religious-right has seized the phrases “pro-life” and “the right to life”. However, I don’t see anything “pro-life” about this view. The “potentiality” of human life for a fetus, in the womb, does not grant it the title of a living child. The fetus is after all, unborn and its potentiallity for life does not designate it as a “living being” until it becomes born by achieving the process of birth.
The unborn does not have rights nor does it have precedents over the already born – or living.
If the religious-right were really “pro-life’ then they would consider the choice of the – living – woman, over the unborn child, who does have this fundamental right, the right over her own body.
“Rights”, to use Ayn Rand’s words, “do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being. A child cannot acquire any rights until it is born.” – this is why women have the choice in the matter and no one else can dictate what she wants to do with her body.
In matters of a women who has a whimsical urge to kill the fetus in her body: this should be considered immoral and she should, probably, be condemned, but the state should have no say to prevent such actions.
I’m sure the decision to abort a fetus ought to be very difficult for women and I doubt they are impetuous in their choice to execute it. There is always the looming possibility of enduring regrets, consequences, and uncertainties – and I am sure women are fully aware of this.
Most of all, what is sadder than a fetus being aborted is the life of a child that grows up with a woman who is mentally and financially incapable of accepting the task. To be a parent is a weighty responsibility and it is a tragedy for a child to grow up under these circumstances.
To force a human into the world without a proper caregiver[s] is the opposite of “pro-life”, and, statistically, it has a higher percent of promoting a miserable life (for both the mother and child). According to the 2016 U.S. Consensus Bureau, out of 12 million single parent families with children under the age of 18, more than 80% were headed by single mothers. In the 2013 U.S. Census, 1 in 4 children were being raised without a father – of this group nearly 50 percent of them live below the poverty line.
In her book, For Better or For Worse, psychologist E. Mavis Hetherington states that although 75 percent of children of divorce suffered no major pathologies, divorces tend to double a child’s risk of a serious negative outcome and states that “twenty-five percent of youths from divorced families in comparison to 10 percent from non-divorced families did have serious social, emotional, or psychological problems.”
Your child has a higher chance of having a shitty life without a second parent and most of the time single parents are not mentally or financially prepared. Although there is nothing, necessarily, wrong with a single parent, what these statistics do show is that most of the time single mothers are not prepared; therefore, we shouldn’t prevent them from making the choices they believe would be best for the fetus – and themselves. After all no one wants to grow up in unfortunate conditions. . . or be forced into accepting unfortunate conditions.
To wrap things up, unplanned pregnancies suck, and are, by definition, the opposite of “pro life” they didn’t actively choose or intend on making life… it seems to me people who are against the womens choice over her own body are as anti-life as you can get.
As Leonard Peikoff so eloquently puts it in his essay, Abortion Rights are Pro-Life:
“The anti-abortionists’ claim to being “pro-life” is a classic Big Lie. You cannot be in favor of life and yet demand the sacrifice of an actual, living individual to a clump of tissue. Anti-abortionists are not lovers of life — lovers of tissue, maybe. But their stand marks them as haters of real human beings.”