Abortion

For many in America, abortion is the only issue that matters on election day. It is the great litmus test for the most extreme ideologues. For me, it is not a big deal. Sure, it is a serious issue, and I don't mean to make light of it. The truth of the matter is that there are very good and legitimate arguements on both side of the issue. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to straddle the fence on this issue. Abortion should either be legal or it should not. One cannot support both positions. I have chosen a side, and I will try to explain my view.
As a Christian, I believe that abortion is wrong. I believe life begins at conception. Abortion is, in fact, the taking of a life. My opinion of whether abortion is morally right or wrong is very strong and unwavering. Moreover, I have had a very personal and painful experience with the issue. My own child became a victim years ago, despite my repeated protests and pleas. The incident had a profound impact on me. For well over a year, I had a very difficult time dealing with the loss. I consider that time in my life to be the worst. I continue to mourn. Ultimately, however, a woman should continue to have the legal option of having a safe abortion.
My reasons for being "pro-choice" are rooted in my basic view of government, as I'm sure is also the case for other people. While I believe abortion is immoral and wrong, I don't think it should be illegal. The responsibility of government is not to determine, decree, or influence what is right or wrong. America was founded on the most basic principle of religious freedom. Morality is a matter that is best decided by individuals in accordance with their trusted clergy and God.
The function of law is to maintain order. Laws are written and enforced to protect everyone. Should not the unborn be protected as well? In principle, they should, but there are so many other factors involved. There are the usual arguments about the long term impact on the mother's life, the short term burden of pregnancy, and the rare, yet occasional instances of contraception failure. These are legitimate and important justifications, however, there are others that I feel are more significant.
An unwanted child faces a life of emotional neglect and resentment. The unwanted children of poor or rich mothers share the same emotional pain. Some will argue that adoption is the solution, but the reality is that society lacks the capacity to provide loving homes for the large number of orphans that would result from the recrimination of abortion. The fate of the unwanted then unadopted children is bleak to be sure.
There are no winners either way, but the current law which has evolved over the years seams to strike the right balance. Unwanted fetuses are spared the loveless life that awaits them. The life is taken at a stage of development that is humane and painless. Yes, it is a life, but not a fully developed one. That distinction should be made and possibly codified.
The more practical issues of abortion extend beyond its mere legality. The devil is always in the details. Should states be able to require parental notification or permission of minors seeking a lawful abortion? Minors are not afforded the same rights to privacy as adults within the law. However, I feel that a girl's pregnancy and its ramifications, which last well into her adulthood, deserve special considerations. A pregnant minor should have unrestricted access to the same alternatives to pregnancy as an adult.
The question of funding appears difficult but is actually quite simple. Should the tax revenues of someone deeply opposed to abortion be used to support its practice? Government does a lot of things with revenues that taxpayers oppose. I have often said that government exists to do the things that the private sector can't or won't do but should. Government can not possibly spend revenues to please every tax payer, nor should it. Moreover, abortion is not the only publicly sanctioned killing. Many more people are killed by tanks, bombs, and guns, which have been purchased by tax dollars from conscientious objectors. Ending federal funding for abortions for the underpriviledged women who seek them is analogous to disbanning our military.
Should partial birth abortions be banned? The priority for this an other similar issues should always be the health of the mother. If a partial birth abortion is the only medical remedy for ensuring the health of a mother, it should remain an option. Otherwise, it's practice should be discontinued. Although, I would have liked to have had more of a legal say in my past experience, the mother bears the ultimate responsibility and burden. There is really little room for debate about spousal permission. I do vehemently support spousal notification. A potential father deserves the right to know about the possibility of parenthood. It should be his legal right to have the opportunity to argue the benefits of parenthood and possibly mitigate some unwarranted apprehensions, if he so chooses.
Almsot no one is "pro abortion". The desire to reduce the number of abortions is almost universal. I believe strongly that recriminalization of abortion unfairly punishes women and children ans is more destructive than the humane practice of abortion. Rather, the goal should be to reduce the number of safe abortions, while maintaining it as a legal option. A strategy of education, contraception availability, development of "morning after" drugs, and adoption should work well toward that goal.