Vail Daily letter: Tricky subject, abortion rights
Vail, CO, Colorado
I would like to add some thoughts to David LeVine’s letter to the editor regarding Roe v. Wade.
As a male, I feel very uneasy taking a stance on pro-choice vs. pro-life arguments. Since it is not my body, I don’t feel it should be my choice.
I agree with Mr. LeVine’s contention that women who are not ready and/or not fit to be a mother have a poor chance of raising well-adjusted children ready to face society’s challenges. Too often these children are raised by grandparents. If the grandparents have the financial resources, the child has a fighting chance. But often this is not the case, particularly with minorities.
Stories of minority kids growing up to be successful and sometimes renowned individuals after being raised by a surviving grandmother working three jobs to make ends meet are often afforded headline news because they deserve just that.
Adoption is also an option, and I know that this is the solution for many new mothers. However, I know from personal experience that adoption can carry its own unique set of consequences that sometimes play out over the entire lifetime of the birth mother, the adoptive parents and the child.
Regardless of what happens to Roe vs Wade, women of means will also find a way to have an abortion if that is their choice. They will travel to another state in which abortions are still legal or to Mexico to have the procedure performed. It is the poor to which anti-abortion laws will be enforced without recourse. The best way to reduce the number of abortions is not through Roe-vs.-Wade-type decisions. It is through use of appropriate sex education and birth control.
I take issue with the Catholic Church and other organizations who demonize contraception and sterilization and to those who believe that abstinence only sex education is effective and that more comprehensive sex education will promote and encourage sex between young unmarried adults.
Study after study have shown that abstinence-only education does not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. And whether you are a creationist or an evolutionist, God or Mother Nature (take your pick), assured that sex between willing couples is pleasurable and floods the bodies of young people going through puberty with raging hormones that guarantee failure of abstinence only programs.
Most young people are going to engage in sexual activity before they are married whether we want them to or not. We then should make it as safe as possible for them and not restrict the means for them to avoid unwanted pregnancies. I believe just as strongly about the use of birth-control methods as the Catholic Church believes in forbidding them. No reconciliation here, ever.
However, I wonder how many Catholics actually follow the Pope’s dictate on this topic. I know far too many Catholic families who ended their family growth after having only two or three children. Whatever, it’s their business and their religion, not mine.
It’s difficult to have light-hearted thoughts in discussing such serious issues, but I’m going to try:
A Catholic priest, a Protestant pastor and a Jewish rabbi were sitting together one afternoon discussing the meaning of life. Their talk got around to when life begins, upon which the priest was adamant that life begins at the moment of conception. The pastor disagreed, stating that life begins at the moment of birth. The rabbi slowly shook his head from side to side. No gentlemen, he said, life begins when the kids leave home and the dog dies.
Upon a recent visit from my daughter, she was recounting a story about the D.C crowd (where she lives) and mentioned a young male acquaintance who has a habit of saying that he is the smartest person he knows. I asked her if her acquaintance travels in small circles.
She said, no, he spends most of his time talking to himself.