Last week was a tough one.
While it's not surprising that Alabama's male congress would vote yes on the most restrictive abortion policy in the nation, effectively overturning RvW, it's a disgrace that the state's governor, a woman, signed the bill.
I come from a life that respected the tenets of Catholicism. I practice weakly, but strive to be compassionate, understanding, charitable and helpful. Lots of things could have gotten me further in my everyday life that I just won't do. I'm no goody-two-shoes, but I don't hurt anyone. Not intentionally, anyway.
However, when it comes to a woman's right to choose, I have to go against what the Church wants for the rest of the nation and place myself firmly in the Pro-Choice category. Needing a procedure is a private and painful choice to make. It shouldn't be made more painful by people who don't know you or your circumstances.
A significant number of women who need the procedure are in fact mothers of families who do not have the ability to add another family member. And while insensitive anti-abortionists cruelly slap the term "inconvenience" to those having late-term abortions, no woman--none--enters that procedure without something very wrong going on with either her body or her child's.
The Pro-Choice/Pro-Life issue is one of female oppression. It's easy to call yourself "reformed" after two or more abortions and fight for others not to have one. Being Pro-Life is easy with social support and economic prosperity: If something doesn't go as planned, you can get what you need by going to another state--like New York--for a "theatre weekend". But, how about being Pro-Woman for a change, and allow women to choose what's safe for their bodies and their lives?
While it's not surprising that Alabama's male congress would vote yes on the most restrictive abortion policy in the nation, effectively overturning RvW, it's a disgrace that the state's governor, a woman, signed the bill.
 |
| "She has neither". 15 x 22" 2-color letterpress print from polymer plate. |
However, when it comes to a woman's right to choose, I have to go against what the Church wants for the rest of the nation and place myself firmly in the Pro-Choice category. Needing a procedure is a private and painful choice to make. It shouldn't be made more painful by people who don't know you or your circumstances.
A significant number of women who need the procedure are in fact mothers of families who do not have the ability to add another family member. And while insensitive anti-abortionists cruelly slap the term "inconvenience" to those having late-term abortions, no woman--none--enters that procedure without something very wrong going on with either her body or her child's.
The Pro-Choice/Pro-Life issue is one of female oppression. It's easy to call yourself "reformed" after two or more abortions and fight for others not to have one. Being Pro-Life is easy with social support and economic prosperity: If something doesn't go as planned, you can get what you need by going to another state--like New York--for a "theatre weekend". But, how about being Pro-Woman for a change, and allow women to choose what's safe for their bodies and their lives?
No comments :
Post a Comment