Roe v. Wade has been sent to the states, I guess. And will be up for vote in the ballots later this year, I guess.
These debates over abortion, I feel, are about religious belief. The arguments that are being made about women’s health are really taking shape around the battle of religious belief, rather than about governance.
First off, the very idea of “inalienable rights” is it self a legal position. There is no such thing as in an alienable right that people are born with essentially; An inalienable right is a right that our government afford citizen people under the law.
It could be that people think an inalienable right is actually something we are born with as human beings regardless of governance, and that could be why no one wants to call out The fact that people are taking the religious position under the guise of science in women’s health — because then that might open up the inevitable insecurity about those people who believe that inalienable rights are not something that government gives us.
Question for those people: What good is an inalienable right if you don’t have the power to keep people from killing you over it?
It’s the inherent irony of religious belief.
However, if we keep governance about trying to keep the peace, and not about the religious questions of what life is or when it begins, then the decision becomes clear: Life is what we do when we’re living with other people.
The problem is that people are arguing about what is life, and not debating about whether or not people will kill each other over this. No one wants to talk about how we are killing people by making them have babies that they don’t wanna have. Because that would have to require of American citizens a little bit too much reflection upon their own ideas of belief and the ramifications of it in real world.
I feel like it’s an elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. I don’t hear it anywhere. The discussion is about science, or about life. I’m not sure whether these things have anything to do with governance or law in the United States.
I think it’s obvious that people who are pro life are trying to push through a religious agenda because they feel that the United States is a Christian country, or at least a 10 Commandments fairing country.
Perhaps that is an overgeneralization, but it seems all this bickering over Roe versus Wade and women’s rights is really missing the issue of abortion and government in the United States.
The role of government is to mediate between Parties so we don’t kill each other.
Aside from that argument, though, I think the pro-life position really is one which says that all human life is valuable, and so as soon as a fetus is conceived in the womb, it is a human life, and so is valuable, and so is protected under the United States government.
To me, pro-life movement seems like a pipe dream that doesn’t want to face the reality of the situation. They take their religious ideals and then find “science“ which appears to agree with it and support it under the notions of women’s health and etc…
It’s as if they wear blinders to the truth of the reality of the situation of pregnancy. It really is like saying that if someone ended up pregnant then it’s because God deemed that this human being should be allowed to continue to live, and that human beings shouldn’t interfere with that life or else it is murder.
…it’s utterly a religious issue in that respect.
For sure, though, I feel that there should be more resources, mental health, physical health, financial, education, etc. for people in general, let alone would be mothers. Yes, that’s true. Yes we should.
But to make people who end up pregnant continue with their pregnancy by virtue of the fact that they got pregnant, is really just saying that they got pregnant because they are immoral or irresponsible. And in this country, don’t you know, we think that people should be responsible for their actions.
Again, that’s an ethical question, that’s a religious question, because it doesn’t deal with the reality that more people are getting pregnant every day than any pro lifer advocate would want to admit, And getting pregnant more often than any sort of mental health or social system could help to absorb.
I agree, actually, that the question should be put to the states. I think that is the issue of the law, beyond the “inalienable rights” to health issue. The law was not written in such a way to be full-proof, and I think that’s what the Supreme Court is making notice of. So they are returning it to the states, basically, telling everyone that they need to write a better law if we are going to make this right of citizens in the United States to control their own bodies.
That’s my two cents