Throughout the past four years the pro-lifers, including our outspoken president George W. Bush have tirelessly and uncompromisingly fought for an overturning of the 1989 Roe v. Wade decision. With a marginally conservative Congress and very supportive president, it seemed that if ever the possibility was realistic, it was then. Yet, despite their valiant and constant efforts, somehow, the right to lifers seemed to miss their eight year window of opportunity to right the wrongs of what they saw as national murder. Indeed this reality must have come as a shocking blow, yet undoubtedly the future is sure to lower pro-life confidence levels even more. As we are all well aware, both the law making and law enforcing branches of government have been freshly reorganized to take on a new and unsympathetic attitude toward the pro-life movement. In short, the future seems dim...
With little to no hope for overriding Roe V. Wade or even limiting the availability of abortions to the public, what is the pro-life camp to do? Most of those who hold this anti-abortion viewpoint draw it from very deep spiritual or ethical convictions that will not be easily compromised. However, few promising options will be offered for pro-lifers for at least four years, probably more. To many, it would be an unrealistic, unproductive, and ultimately wasteful endeavor to continue to fight for something that simply can not happen. These pragmatics offer more reasonable options. Drawing from the statistic that clearly links abortion to poverty, they suggest that pro-lifers divert their efforts to social, rather than legal battles. They argue that if poverty were limited, abortions would in turn decrease.
In my opinion, this suggestion on it's own is a good one. It can not be disproved that more abortions occur in places where mothers have fewer financial options. Undoubtedly increased emphasis on social justice would limit the number of abortions annually, ultimately saving hundreds, even thousands of lives. Indeed the results of this very tangible possibility are obvious and promising. For this reason I feel that, given new political circumstances, this new avenue needs to be further explored. However, this does not mean that the seemingly impossible goal of eliminating the practice of abortion should be abandoned. All social movements suffer setbacks, but only those that persevere ultimately succeed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You should check current statistics concerning socio-economic and race criteria. I think you may be surprised. Check the dates. Some of the internet info is old.
You write:
"Increased emphasis on social justice would limit the number of abortions annually, ultimately saving hundreds, even thousands of lives."
How so? Wondering how you define "social justice."
You write that if poverty were limited, abortions would decrease. What percentage of those living in the designated poverty level have abortions? Is it really greater than say the middle class?
What do you think you might be able to do to help change the minds of young and not so young women in terms of having a baby instead of aborting it?
Other than overturning Roe V. Wade, what do think we as a community, a society, should do. Overturning Roe v. Wade is not going to stop abortions. It will send women to the alleys and places that will be unsafe and unsanitary.
What can we do to change the minds of young people and others even though Roe v Wade may continue.
If we criminalize abortions, what will the punishment be? Do we send women to prison for attempting an abortion? How will we enforce a law that says abortion is a criminal offense?
Post a Comment