Sometimes, I sit in front of my computer in shock of the topic I am about to write about, this is one of those times. Actually, I never do that — even in the heat of a GOP primary, I pretty expect the bullshit that our society churns out on a daily basis. But this has gotten out of control. By rule, I ignore news on abortion, because the issue is manufactured by both sides. It is not a government issue, no more or less than whether or not I masturbate.
Come to think of it, though; if Bachmann had her way, she’d probably outlaw my right to jerk off. In which case, I would officially go postal. I always say I’m moving to Canada, but…
Not too long ago, I wrote about the personhood of corporations and how the Republican Party continues to prop up their status in society, not only equal to people — but often times it seems like businesses and corporations are the only thing that matter. We all just live in their world, apparently. Now, the personhood status of something none of us can see is now in the political debate. Most of us can’t even see it with a typical home microscope, either. Without shock or surprise, we are debating the status of a zygote.
Now, I’m sick of writing long blog posts. So, go find the definition somewhere. You were a zygote once, and just a few hours before that you were residing in your fathers scrotum. There is humor in that last sentence, but I’m not joking at all. Apparently, abortion is still a major problem in our society. It has become so rampant that Mississippi has gone stark raving insane.
I have a disclaimer here: I have talked a number of times about the loss my wife and I experienced with our stillborn son, however, I don’t talk about nearly as much as I think about it, or want to when I’m writing. I try to keep it all objective and analytical. When it comes to abortion, that experience was very enlightening and helped me shape a ton of the abstract textbook knowledge I have on the issue.
That being said, I have always thought that the labels of “pro-choice” and “pro-life” are inaccurate and shallow, and their supporters are emotional and misinformed. I am not pro-choice, or anti-choice; I am not pro-life, or anti-life. I find this issue to be so very difficult.
If I were a representative of constituents and you sent me a parental notification bill, I would vote for it. If it required both parents, I would not. If you sent me a partial birth abortion ban, and it was after the 2nd trimester, I would vote for it. If it was before “Week 20”, I would not. I see no reason to oppose late term abortion (30 Weeks or Later).
I would like to limit the amount of abortions that one person can have and I find the argument that this is a feminist-bodily rights issue to be absurd. Those people should never be allowed to procreate, because their ability to see past their own selfish self-interest is clearly impossible. If you can get pregnant, and all you can think about are your own rights — I promise — you will be a shitty mother. Spare your would-be children.
So, before you label me some blow-hard hippie liberal, I am right-leaning on this issue by any non-crazy standard.
But, guess what? According to the Morbidity Report in 2003, 1.4% of abortions occur after Week 21 of gestation. If you listen to doctors, the AMA will tell you that no pregnancy is viable before Week 21. It has only happened once, I believe it was last year, and it was a pretty big deal. Almost all are viable after Week 27, and the curve is quite expotential between those weeks; trust me, I know from experience.
I tell you these facts because the abortion debate can no longer be about abortion. Roe v. Wade has been upheld by nearly 20 high-profile court cases. It has become established law. If you stacked the court with 9 Scalia‘s, they would have a hard time overturning it, because it was become the most historic and controversial decision in history with nothing in American jurisprudence to justify the decision.
So, we move to defining personhood, and we put that point at conception — an entirely philsophical, moral, and spiritual discussion. It is not a policy discussion.
I should say that again: It is not a policy discussion.
It is not. A policy issue.
If it was a policy discussion, it would open up a Pandora’s Box of unintended consequences from poverty, employment, health care, education, foster care, parenting, day care, living wage, and the list could go on forever. But, since it isn’t a policy discussion, these issues shouldn’t be discussed. Not that they would be, because I have found that the only people who care about this issue only care about this issue, so they don’t know about or care about anything else.
Legal rights are not up to popular vote or civic debate. I could honestly give a shit about Christianity and religion anymore. I can honestly say that every problem I have encountered in adulthood can be traced back to a Christian bigot. You can teach your kid whatever you want, but for you Conservatives that rail about your fetish for the Constitution and the rights granted therein should read the document. It has gotten to a point where I could argue with a Republican simply by quoting the Constitution back at them.
Women don’t have a right to have an abortion (without reasonable limits).
Abortion is unethical, inhumane, and cold (but so is the alternative).
Your “policy” response to the problems most of use agree on is, yet again, not based on fact, substance, or law. It is simply based in emotion and religion. It’s really kind of simple: A person has an asshole…asshole.