“A person’s a person, no matter how small” Dr. Seuss
This might be one of my most controversial blogs ever. I hope I don’t offend anyone but I’m just a bit perplexed. All the talk in Texas politics of late centers on State Senator Wendy Davis’ recent 11th hour filibuster that resulted in a new bill not being passed…well, kind of. The bill was actually passed but due to a large and vocal crowd in attendance and in support of Davis’ efforts, it happened just minutes past the midnight deadline. A special session was called and the proposal won swift approval today in the House, which now sends it to the Senate. It was the third time the Texas state house passed the bill and all but one Republican voted for the bill, along with four Catholic Democrats. The Senate could vote on the bill as early as Friday, making Texas far from the first state to legislate strict abortion measures. The bill? Legislation that would make it illegal to abort babies past 20 weeks of pregnancy, except in the case of severe fetal abnormalities or to protect the life or health of the mother. Twenty weeks. That’s five months out of a standard nine month pregnancy people. More than half of that little fetus’ “life.”
Let me make this clear, this is not a pro-life or pro-choice editorial. Those of you who know me know where I stand on the matter. What this is about is it being okay to terminate a human life five months into gestation. Experts agree that at this point in a pregnancy, the baby can hear and recognize its mother’s voice, has taste buds and is swallowing, has toe and fingernails, its hair is growing, its heartbeat can be heard, and the mom can feel it moving. Babies have survived outside the womb at 21 weeks. Does it make sense that killing a child outside the womb at 24 weeks is murder, but having an abortion at 24 weeks is okay? Perhaps what baffles me the most is why on earth would someone need to wait five months to decide if they want to keep the baby growing inside of them?
The argument of course is that it should be a woman’s right to choose to have that baby, not the government’s. Those for the bill’s passage contend that that very baby is a living, breathing being and terminating its life amounts to nothing short of murder. Yes, I’m against big government being in my business but I also believe that a fetus at 20 weeks is clearly a human, as opposed to non-human, being that deserves basic human rights. If you don’t agree with this, then you must not consider the fetus a human or a person for that matter. I’m not here to argue the entire choice/life agenda; I’m just here to ask for clarification from the “I Stand with Wendy Davis” supporters. Large, vocal crowds have a way of convincing fence-setters to join their side. All I ask is for you folks to look deep in your hearts and decide just what a 20 week old baby is. What did you look like at five months pregnant? Did you feel that little bundle of joy inside of you was a mere blob of cells or a baby boy or girl who you may have already named?
“I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion is already born.”
Another argument is that of what to do in cases of rape, incest, or birth defects. My question is, as catastrophic as those cases are and as horrified I would be if facing either of those realities, are those babies less human than others? Who’s to say that fetus won’t grow up to find the cure to cancer? I immediately think of Steve Jobs who was adopted and is quoted as saying about his birth mother, “I wanted to meet [her] mostly to see if she was OK and to thank her, because I’m glad I didn’t end up as an abortion.”
So, it’s a woman’s right to choose, right? What about the dad? Should he have a say? What’s the answer when momma doesn’t want to have the baby but daddy does? Isn’t society in desperate need of more fatherly involvement and guidance? Consider the following data compiled by “Children: Our Ultimate Investment”:
• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
• 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes
• 80% of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes
• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes
• 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes
• 70% of youths in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes.
• 85% of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes.
While a clear majority of Americans want abortion to be legal in some fashion, a solid majority supports more restrictions. A 2013 Gallup poll found that 64 percent of Americans believe abortion should be illegal during weeks 13-24 but 80 percent believe it should be illegal after 24. Somewhat amazing is that women are more likely than men to think abortion is generally wrong, and more women (50 percent) support the Texas 20-week ban than men (46 percent) nationwide. Still, the pro-choice movement wants virtually no limits on abortion, including the quest to mainstream a medical procedure—elective late-term abortion—that most of the civilized world finds barbaric and abhorrent. In many European countries, you can’t get an abortion past 12 weeks, except in narrow circumstances. In January, Gallup reported that 80 percent of Americans think abortion should be illegal in the third trimester, and 64 percent think it should be illegal in the second trimester. Surprisingly, only 37 percent of today’s “Millennials” generation thinks abortion is morally acceptable. This makes them far more anti-abortion than were Baby Boomers or Gen Xers at their age.
Another point of contention for me is that for many pro-choicers, pro-lifers are not and cannot be considered feminists. Aside from the choice/life argument I like to bring up two women who people either love or hate: Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. Feminists generally admire Hillary Clinton but abhor Sarah Palin. This baffles me. A feminist is defined as someone who advocates equal rights for women. When one hears the word “feminist,” one thinks of a strong, smart, successful, ambitious, compassionate and accomplished woman. Call me silly but I believe a woman who has gotten where she is on her own merits rather than her spouse’s, has raised a large family that includes a special needs son, has a loving and devoted husband, single-handedly toppled a long-standing political machine, can shoot a deer and then cook it for dinner, and successfully run a ginormous and physically rugged state that borders Russia is much more of a “feminist” than one who got to where she is on her husband’s coat-tails; a husband who cheated on her, publically humiliated her, and with whom she basically lives a separate life. Okay, I digress.
For pro-lifers, much goes back to their faith that murder is just murder and that scripture uses the same language for the unborn as it does other children. Luke’s gospel uses the word “baby” and “child” interchangeably and the bible does not speak of the unborn child as an unthinking, unfeeling tissue mass, but as a person with whom God interacts. “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you.” (Jeremiah 1:5) In addition, children were never seen as “unwanted” or as a nuisance, but as a gift from God — the highest possible blessing (Psalm 127:3-5, 113:9, Gen. 17:6, 33:5, etc.)
I know many of you wonderful readers of my blog disagree with much of this, but I am hoping this opens up a civilized dialog on the subject. Yes, I know it’s the woman’s child she is carrying, not the government’s, but does society in the form of government have a responsibility to protect an unborn human life from being killed?
Okay, now back to fashion, décor, and witty musings!