The Supreme Court's decision allowing a woman to do what she wants with her body is one of the most contentious pieces of litigation that this country has seen in the last sixty years. Abortion is a hot-button issue, and you'll rarely find anyone in this country that doesn't have an opinion on it. However, this issue has got me thinking, and I find that I'm viewing things in a much different light, given my lack of ability to reproduce.
The name, Jane Roe, was obviously a pseudonym. Her real name was Norma McCorvey. She had two children by the time she was nineteen. Her first pregnancy occurred when she was sixteen, and the result of an abusive relationship. Her second child was placed up for adoption. Her third pregnancy, and the one at the heart of the Roe v. Wade dispute, was actually born. She never underwent the abortion and the baby was placed up for adoption. Since then, Norma McCorvey has led an interesting life. She's a lesbian and has lived with her partner for many years in North Texas. She's also a Republican, a devout Catholic, and now campaigns tirelessly for an unborn child's right to life. She has continually expressed remorse for her contribution in the class action, claiming she was simply a pawn, utilized by two ambitious (and female) attorneys.
I've read the text of Roe v. Wade at least a dozen times. You'd have to believe that this was part of the law school curriculum, and it was even more hotly debated at the Catholic law school I attended. In essence, it gives a woman the right to do with her body as she sees fit. I believe that this characterization, even if painted with broad brush strokes, should be something that women hold dear. I can say, with absolute certainty, that if the government ever tried to legislate on what I can or cannot do to my body, I would be one of the first people on the steps of the Capitol, trying to protect my right to privacy.
But this is about the bigger picture. Last year, there were over 800,000 abortions performed in the United States alone. In China, you can't have more than one child, and abortion is technically a free service offered by the government. The "one child" policy has become more relaxed in recent years, but it surprised me when I learned that the policy has been in place for almost thirty years. In contrast, Chile and El Salvador prohibit abortion under any circumstances, even if the mother's life is at risk. The theory behind the law is that Chileans believe that the life of the unborn child is greater than it's mother's life.
At the end of the day, I think I still come down on the side of a woman's right to choose. I think. I suppose, more objectively, I believe that the government shouldn't control my reproductive rights, in the same way I believe China shouldn't be able to control the nation's family planning. But I see the way my friends carry their pregnant bellies around, and you can already tell they'd die for the life inside of them, and I wonder if Latin America doesn't have an equally good argument as well. I don't suppose there's ever going to be a policy that all Americans can agree on.
I was talking to my friend, Steve, last night. Steve and I have been good friends for years, and I've always been able to talk things over with him, even things as uncomfortable as infertility. I should also mention that Steve is a die-hard Republican, and this has been the source of many hearty debates over the years. Steve calls to tell me what he's been learning in his "Natural Family Planning" Class (side note: He's getting married in July), hoping to pass his recent knowledge on to me. I told him I'd heard it all (because really, I have). And, as it usually happens with us, we got on a political subject where our opinions diverge. Abortion. I told him what I thought about it, feeling as though my opinion should carry much more weight than his, since I am obviously a woman. He told me to think about how many aborted babies could be put up for adoption, and increase my chances if abortion weren't legal.
It makes you think.
According to some (possibly unreliable) statistics, there are two million couples in the United States that are infertile. Now, who knows how many of those people actually want to have children, but at the end of the day, if we take a lesson from Chile and put the baby's life ahead of our own needs and short foresight, we could decrease that number of childless couples.
But, that's just a thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment