Hillary Clinton titled her 2004 memoir "Living History," and today, that's what we're all doing. The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has coincided with a schedule of arguments before the Supreme Court that will have an enduring impact on women's access to reproductive health care. The first of these cases, Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, is being argued today.
Can I ask people to stop and think for a few minutes about what we really mean by abortion? Do we mean a process, a surgical or indeed a chemical intervention, that is designed to terminate an entity which - if left peacefully - might grow, change, alter to become something else? In some fantasy world far far away a long long time ago, people used to like babies and dislike killing. I must have landed on the wrong planet....Beam me up, Scottie.
If this writer contends that women will be the losers if access to abortion is restricted, ergo some babies might be the winners. There is something uniquely wonderful about Human Beings - especially the female species - and that is that great thing called Empathy. With empathy, we can imagine the pain or suffering of our fellow beings and be so moved by this imagined suffering that we compelled to try and alleviate their suffering or comfort them. (Its maybe a psychological disease labeled Good Samaritan Syndrome). Can we not agree that empathy is a good thing? Can we not also agree that if doing something for one's own benefit does harm to another then maybe we shouldn't do it?
I have entered the bear pit and will be torn to shreds by the unthinking mob - all for the crime of wanting not to hurt other Human Beings, be they young, defenceless and unable to speak for themselves. The greatest act of Humanity is to lay down one's life for others, so I suppose one has little choice in the matter...
Your very idealistic view on life is honorable, yet hardly reflective of the often harsh and cold realities faced by so many people in America.
Here is the problem: when that fetus/baby is BORN the so-called "pro-lifers" (more accurately titled "pro-birthers") couldn't care less about it. This is evidenced by their constant efforts to cut programs that many of these 'birthed' fetuses/babies need for their basic survival!
With all due respect, life ain't so grand and awesome when it starts out in poverty, neglect, abuse, or simply not being wanted. Life is hardly "sunshine, lollipops and rainbows". If it were, I might just agree with your perspective.
'Tis not enough to be birthed - to have life. 'Tis imperative for that life to have a fighting chance at good health, security, love and meaning!
Thankyou for your very decent and respectful response - testament to your innate decency. "Respect" is a powerful concept core to this topic. Without getting into imagining what other people's thoughts might be concerning child welfare, lets keep it nice and simple: if indeed a child is born into poverty in this lala land I wish for, but due to unforeseen events, the mother becomes suddenly poor and unsupported, none would contemplate killing the child for the fact of its poverty. Patently, poverty should not be the determinant factor on whether one lives or dies. Can life be so bad through poverty that we would prefer death - either for ourselves or for our children? Life indeed will not be so "grand and awesome", but it is still life and all the more precious for it. In my Lala Land, other Humans would see another Human in need and offer their help and support. This is what family, neighbours and society has always done - and always will. In the extreme Capitalism which prevails today, there seems to be less Humanity around. So the deficit is not money, but Humanity. By thinking of Human Life only in financial terms, then we will have become active agents in the very dysfunction that prevails. Two wrongs have never made a right. Human Life is precious beyond anything that any accountant can measure. P.S. in Lala Land, there are no accountants: we train them to be musicians...