With the presidential elections at the door, one of the tickets each party has been leaning on to attract voters is the right to choose life. What does being pro-life actually mean? What criteria should be used when determining who’s right and who’s wrong?
There are many who denounce abortion, but condone those who kill in the name of life, or are open supporters of the death penalty. Killing is killing, whether the victim is a fetus, a child, a father, a doctor or a criminal.
Everybody has a right to live, but many appear to be bias in regard to choosing which type of life has more or less right to thrive.
Being pro-life does not mean that abortion should be illegal. It means that the individual believes in the value of life and chooses not to have an abortion because she has the right to bring life forth.
Criminalization of abortion did not reduce the number of women who sought abortions. It is estimated that in the years before Roe vs. Wade the number of illegal abortions ranged as high as 1.2 million per year.
Many women died or suffered serious medical problems after attempting to self-induce their abortions or going to untrained practitioners who performed abortions with primitive methods or in unsanitary conditions.
Putting the federal government in charge of a choice which should be strictly personal, and considered on individual basis rather than a whole, would make us no different than the Asian countries obligating their women not to have children.
Life needs to be respected for the value it has, all across the board.
Abortion should not be taken lightly or be a substitute for contraception. Yet, women should have the right to decide what is appropriate for them, one way or the other. If I was raped and became pregnant, I feel that it should be up to me to decide whether I want to bring forth the product of a vicious attack; others should not decide for me regarding something that affects me so closely.
