|
Does the common decency argument cover the 40 million plus abortions that have taken place in the USA since R. vs W.? While I respect the rule of law, but after having children, and to hold my significantly premature niece in the palm of my hand, then to witness her 12th birthday this year... we're kidding ourselves if we don't look at abortion as anything less than murder. At the same time my niece was becoming "viable" ... other babies of the same age were being killed as an inconvenience.
I don't want anyone to suffer in life. But with my experiences I can no longer rationalize the act of abortion as a personal choice about one's body. If viability outside the womb is the bench-mark, then anyone on life-support is no longer viable outside the womb. Why is this any different? Does anyone here regret the opportunity at life?
The law is the law in regards to choice. However, the law also prohibits funding abortions. If PPH suffers from funding cuts, then so be it. They can regroup and find funding somewhere else. I'm sure they will be fine.
As an aside - I think if more of us researched Margaret Sanger and the roots of PPH, I'd hope your findings would leave you disgusted. She was an unapologetic racist, eugenicist, and Fabian socialist. But that may be more than OK with some of you. It's all out there if you care to look it up. A monstrously vile human being.
__________________
"It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo
|