Archive for the ‘pro-life’ Tag
Every stage of my career has called for making complex things simple, but no matter how much sleep I lose, or how much thinking I do in between, or how much I focus on the issue when I do my daily half-hour walk, or how long I sit in front of the computer and try, there’s just no way I can make it simple. The killing of the right to abortion reaches into every aspect of life like athletesfoot creeping into the tissues. So I’ve decided to focus on just one piece of it, ignoring the women and their families who are impacted, the chipping away at freedom, the children who are threatened with the loss of a parent, the pain suffered by women denied palliative medication …. Nope, I’ll pretend the only thing that matters is that every zygote should be allowed to develop into an embryo, every embryo should be allowed to become a fetus, and every fetus should be allowed ultimately to be expelled from the uterus on its path to the outside world.
It seems to me that the first thing that matters is that the environment in which the development happens should approach an ideal if we want to reach our survival-to- birth goal. But there seems to be a problem when we look at the evidence.
“According to this year’s America’s Health Ranking Annual Report, the U.S. infant mortality rate is 5.9 deaths per 1,000 live infant births, while the average rate of infant mortality among the OECD countries is 3.9 deaths per 1,000 live births. Compared with other OECD countries, the U.S. ranks No. 33 out of 36 countries (Figure 62). Iceland is ranked No. 1 and has the lowest rate with 0.7 deaths per 1,000 live births. Mexico is ranked last with 12.1 deaths per 1,000 live births. New Hampshire and Vermont are tied for the top state in the U.S. with 3.9 deaths per 1,000 live births. These two neighboring states have achieved an infant mortality rate equal to the OECD average. As the bottom-ranked state, however, Mississippi has an infant mortality rate more than twice that of the OECD average at 8.9 deaths per 1,000 live births and internationally ranks below all but two of the OECD countries. Over the past 50 years, the decline in the U.S. infant mortality rate has not kept pace with that in other OECD countries. When examining sex- and age-adjusted infant mortality rates from 2001 to 2010, the U.S. rate was 75 percent higher than the average rate in 20 OECD comparable countries.” (Copied from the web.)
If you’re curious, OECD refers to “the Paris-based Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) [which] is an international organization that promotes policies to improve the economic and social well-being of people worldwide” (Also copied from the web).
Since this kind of information is easily available for anyone dedicated to the “pro life” position, it’s obvious that the next step, after requiring every pregnant woman to give birth, is to press for the provision of ideal health care for pregnant (and potentially pregnant) women. That, it seems to me, would require lobbying on a federal level, or at the many state levels, for funding for universal maternal care.
Also, given that human infants are born helpless, requiring many years of care just to stay alive, one would assume that those who are pro the life of all fetuses would lobby to follow through with the project by funding parental leave for a sufficiently long period of time as well as providing perpetual support of the health of the parent(s)/caretakers with adequate insurance. And, of course, there would be the need for food and shelter throughout the years. That would require lobbying for sufficient affordable housing for all families as well as sufficient incomes to provide food and clothing.
I said I’d keep it simple. None of this says anything about the overall quality of life of the individuals as their lives develop. Just the basic demand that life be required.
Like this:
Like Loading...
There’s nothing so beautiful as a happy, thriving child. And nothing so sad as a child born into poverty, neglect, and even abuse. So why am I pro-choice?
#1. I am not in favor of condemning a child to misery and a tragic adulthood which might well ultimately negatively affect the surrounding society.
#2. The person carrying the embryo/fetus/ultimate child is not an empty box just carrying a load. That person is a host whose body functions change to supply the necessities for the potential life within. Indeed, the life within may cause severe health hazards for the bearer. Consider, for example this observation to be found on p. 43 of the September 2021 issue of the Scientific American.
Autoimmunity may be an unfortunate by-product of the
Complex immune response women need to bear children
And that’s not the only health danger — even to the point of death.
#3. The life of the pregnant one is every bit as important as that of the potential child. In fact, given life circumstances, may be many times more crucial to the goodness of life.
#4. For all these reasons the decision to birth a child is one that belongs to a woman, her doctor, her relationship to others, and her spiritual advisor.
Like this:
Like Loading...
My friend was outed the other day as a Democrat. “Really?” a man nearby reacted, “But I thought you were a Christian.” Yes. He really believes that Democrats are not Christians. Wow! Is my reaction.
And I’m a Democrat BECAUSE I strive to be a follower of Jesus (who, remember, was a practicing Jew.) Unlike that man, I don’t assume that all members of any political party think alike. I know many Republicans who choose that party because they feel they have a home there for their Christian beliefs, just as I feel the Democratic Party supports more of mine. So why am I a Democrat? (except when I vote for a Reublican.)
I think that with the Democrats I have a better chance for freedom to follow my beliefs without government interference. I do understand that there are those who see things differently – who are sure that a true believer would want to impose the “right” religion by way of government action. You know what? I think they have their right to believe that. That’s why we have discussions, debates, and even elections.
I choose the side of the Democrats, though, because I believe I have a moral/ religious home there. I’ll vote for life every time. That’s right: I’m pro-life; therefore I’m pro-choice. I believe all life is valuable – not just the life of the newly implanted fertilized ovum. In fact, I have a hard time understanding the belief that God somehow loves that embryo so much that it would be worth it to sacrifice the life of the woman He once thought so valuable when she was in the form of an embryo. And have no doubt. A woman’s body is not an inactive box. Pregnancy is a hazard. I’ll stop myself from the rant I want to start about the complexities of pregnancies and choices.
By the way, pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. I prefer the Democratic position of supporting options for women to gain access to reproductive information and pregnancy prevention. For poor women, that means I’m in favor of supporting Planned Parenthood whose function is to promote the life of both mother and child through prenatal care and health maintenance.
I’m in favor of life for physicians who practice perfectly legal abortions.
Oh, and even if they were illegal, because I am opposed to the death penalty, I’m still in favor of life. I could rant about that too.
I’m opposed to locking people away in privately owned prisons where each inmate represents a profit. I’m in favor of doing all possible to encourage the productive life of those who are or have been inmates.
I believe in an education that encourages creativity, not only for those who can afford it, but for those in poverty whose schools and families need help.
I believe in recognizing the humanity and value of all immigrants.
I’m opposed to war as anything but a very last resort for solving problems.
I believe in maintaining the life of the earth – even the universe — and the scientists who study its health.
I favor an atmosphere that encourages forgiveness and help with forgiveness. Oh, not making excuses for wrongdoing. I said I try to be a follower of Jesus. I don’t believe he ever said, “Oh, don’t worry about it. Just do what feels right to you.” I think he was more likely to say “Go and sin no more.” He was big, I believe, on promoting justice for all, rich or poor, even Samaritans.
OK, there’s more. It seems to me his list of what to do to attain the Kingdom was not to follow a whole bunch of rules. Wasn’t it more like “Love God and love your neighbor as yourself?” See the lessons of Job
Well, anyway. That’s why I feel more at home as a Democrat. And I get it. Not all Republicans identify as Christian and not all Democrats are non-Christians. I like it that way (These days I rarely use the word Christian, now that it’s been so politicized.). There’s room for all of us under the big umbrella that is the United States that brought my parents here as immigrants. That includes Sikhs, Muslims, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unitarians, Roman Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Hindu, atheists, agnostics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists … I know, the list isn’t complete. That’s the point. That’s the America I love.
Like this:
Like Loading...
monagustafsonaffinito 