Friday, October 12, 2007

Abortion

An article in the New York Times today, entitled "Legal or Not, Abortion Rates Compare," reported the interesting findings of a survey of various nations of the world with regard to abortion rates and legality of the procedure in those nations. Briefly summarized, it found that abortion rates were higher in those areas where the procedure is illegal. Furthermore, the chance of death from such procedures was much higher in those same areas. This has compelled me to list some of my thoughts on the issue of abortion, which deviate markedly from those of other members of my religion.

I think that women should have full rights over their bodies. When a woman becomes pregnant, she becomes the caretaker for the human embryo housed within her womb. Of course, not all caretakers are as good as others, and some cause considerable, at times unrepairable, damage to the fetus through the imbibing of alcohol and use of other harmful substances. In many states, there are
laws against such actions in order to protect the future life of the fetus. Therefore, I think a woman should have the option of cancelling her enrollment in such a course that would require her to give up her rights to certain legal activities. While it is true that abstinence would be the ultimate preventative measure, women can not always maintain that high standard. Should a minor slip-up result in a minimum nine month sentence of pain and misery for a woman who has no wish to be a mother? Should a child be born into a world where he is neither wanted nor cared for properly?

Many equate abortion with murder, saying that death of a human life is the same, regardless of when it takes place. However, it is necessary to examine the differences between life in the womb and life after birth. In the womb, the fetus is dependent on the mother's life-force to stay alive. It is a part of the woman's body, attached and connected, unable to move about freely. It is not an autonomous being at this point, because if it were removed from the woman's body, it would die. Even if science reaches the point where an embryo can be cultivated and nurtured outside of the natural womb, I don't think these would be seen as equal alternatives to a normal pregnancy. If a woman sees another being utilizing her resources as an unwanted partnership, then she should be able to terminate the relationship. The child is not truly born until he is removed from the womb, and until then, he should not have the equal rights of a child. If a child is considered the same life both inside and outside of the womb, then why do we celebrate a child's birthday on the day of their delivery? Shouldn't this be traced to the point of conception, if life has officially begun at that moment?

Of course, there are limits to my overall permission for abortion. I think that a woman should have to make her decision early in the pregnancy. Once she has begun, then she must accept her choice and see it through to the end (except, of course, in cases of medical emergency where her life is in danger, or other extenuating circumstances that I may not be aware of). In other words, I don't think a woman should be able to end the life of a fetus the day prior to her delivery date just because she wants to; at that point there'd need to be a better reason. I think all abortions should be done only after discussion with a competent physician, and only after proper counseling has been completed.

I realize that this puts me in the minority in my religion. I personally feel that this is a matter of free agency; limiting a woman's right to choose in this aspect is not at all in keeping with our Church's doctrine. While I would never want to miss out on the opportunity to raise a child that God has granted to be conceived, it is not up to me to force that upon anyone. Prohibiting abortion causes many more problems than it fixes, and I feel that it is the wrong course to take in making society a better place.

I'd love to hear comments telling me I'm wrong ... I'm always open to altering my perception of important issues. This issue in particular just gets me upset, because it seems like everyone in Utah sees it as a cut-and-dry topic: abortion=murder=bad, and I disagree.

2 comments:

John D. Moore said...

Is it the abortion=murder or the murder=bad part of the equation that bothers you, or is it the whole thing?

Stupid jokes that make me sound like a jackass aside, good thoughts. I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise, because I'm on the cutely-named pro-choice side of the fence.

One of the things that has baffled me is that many justify abortion in terms of rape or incest. Don't get me wrong, I fully support abortion in these cases, personally. But in terms of debate on the issue, allowing this presumed precious, human life to die simply due to awful circumstances (what about some marriages, yuk yuk) seems a flaw in an argument people try to present logically, however, if I do remember correctly, it's the Church's (or at least some high-ranking leaders') official stance.

Besides, abortions are going to happen way way or another. Better under fluorescent lighting than in an alley or creating a rogue class of mooonlighting doctors. Really, you'd rather your sixteen-year-old daughter not have a medical procedure done with a wire hanger.

G.C.C. said...

This is the most cogent argument I have read concerning this ethical dilemma. Bravo.