In light of my earlier post, I want to pose a question about the pro-life/pro-choice debate. I want to begin by saying that I am not anti-live, although I am pro-choice. I hate this rhetorical distinction. I mean, I'm against the death penalty, but I am for a woman's right to govern her own body. I digress.
Here is my question: why is it that most members of certain political party are pro-life, yet they often do not support programs (like Head Start, Welfare, Medicaid, etc.) which would improve the quality of life for the babies they so desperately want to be born? As a good, good friend of mine once said, "Many Republicans care about babies, until they're born."
3 comments:
Yes, I always wonder about the same things.
And there's something else, tangentially related (and pretty polemic, perhaps), that I don't like and that goes hand-in-hand with their anti-abortion push: the pro-adoption rationale as a solution to abortion. (The rationale is that adopting a baby is akin to saving it -- not only the life but also, making it a Christian baby if it's from a country like China, etc.). The problem with that is that nobody cares about the birth-mother, they just want babies for families who need them.
In any case... they (policy makers maybe, but more markedly adoption agencies that try to convince women not to abort) only care about the baby if it's going to fulfill the needs of an infertile couple, if the mother decides to keep the baby, she's & the baby are on their own like you pointed out in your post. Very sad.
I value life, and I know that given my religious convictions, maybe I should be "pro-choice," but I can't. I think that a woman has to be able to choose, even because placing a baby for adoption is way more traumatizing than having an abortion. (and I hate the whole "adoption as salvation" rationale, it is detrimental to mothers & babies to begin with).
A writer friend of mine says they are "pro-fetus", not pro-life, because all those programs are beneficial to life. She frequently talks about the mentality of some of the extreme right (which she grew up around so she can explain why they think their thought process is "logical" to them). I can't seem to find her one article on it right now, but if I do, I'll pass it on.
Part of it is they are SO concerned with what they view is murder, but the ALSO very much believe that everyone should fend for themselves, that if you're poor, etc then you must have done something to deserve that. Because these two views occur in the same group, they just don't see any reason to support those programs.
My view is becoming increasingly cynical. It seems we don't care about trying to keep guns out of the hands of people who clearly are not equipped to handle them safely, yet we're okay with legislating women's bodies. I do not get it.
Post a Comment