Friday, February 4, 2011

H.R. 358 and Anti-Choice Politicians

New Bill, New Problems for Anti-Choice Politicians :: NARAL Pro-Choice America:

Rep. Joe Pitts (T-PA)
Even as they attempted to modify this rape-related provision found in two pieces of legislation, H.R. 3 and H.R. 358, these lawmakers inserted a new provision on page six of H.R.358, sponsored by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), that would allow hospitals to refuse to provide abortion care when necessary to save a woman’s life.
Let me start by saying I'm a father of two, I love my children in a way I couldn't have imagined was possible before they were born, and, I would gladly, eagerly give up my life for either of them. Heart donation, stepping in front of a bullet, you name it, without a second thought or a regret, it would be easiest decision I ever made. But they're almost 5 now; they're their own people, and would suffer their own destruction. When they were fetuses, if being pregnant with them endangered my wife's life, the decision to save her life would be just as easy. A doctor that could save my wife, but wouldn't because it would require aborting the fetuses, would be a doctor at risk of having his or her head smashed through the nearest wall. Seriously. You don't trade a fully-formed human, an actual (actualized, if you must) person, for a fetus, or two fetuses, or five.

Continuing this hypothetical, if my wife had said, "even if it kills me, I want to try to have these babies," then there'd be some difficult discussions. I would argue my case and try to convince her that, essentially, fetuses are replaceable, people are not. If I lost the argument, I would concede it's her life to live or sacrifice as she pleased. The idea that these American Taliban think it's proper for their higher valuation of fetal life to trump a woman's decision ever -- especially when her life is on the line -- is repugnant. 
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...