PRO: Clint Crawford
The recent passage of the anti-abortion legislation in South Dakota reiterates the danger in attempting to govern with moral dictation instead of concern for the well-being and safety of citizens.
This newest peak of conservative furor over Roe v. Wade makes any abortion a felony other than when a pregnant woman’s life is in danger. This dangerous victory for the religious right ignores several vital issues surrounding abortion. The physical and mental trauma inherent in such atrocities as rape and incest are magnified by removing the opportunity for a victim of unwilling pregnancy to abort.
Young women, who perhaps are only in their early years of puberty, may be forced by some terrifying and nightmarish violation into having a child while still lacking life experience and maturity. In addition, she and her child would also be completely financially dependant upon her guardians, whose own sense of responsibility and charity may not stretch to include the great care and expense required to raise an infant. If the child is brought to term, it faces a huge risk of sub-par existence in either the confusing and degrading orphan system, or with a mother who very likely finds great difficulty in simply taking care of herself, let alone caring for her extremely dependant baby.
Because there are so many unpredictable contributing factors to reasons a woman might choose abortion, it seems irresponsible that South Dakota would remove this option from virtually any situation. It is vital that a woman should be given the opportunity, regardless of age, to a quick and safe alternative.
The anti-abortion laws represent the obscuring of the concern for the welfare of women by moral and religious convictions. Religious values are a fine and important thing, but to turn the views of a particular religion into laws in a nation that supposedly offers freedom from religious interference in government is deeply wrong. Living in a democracy, we must reach an understanding that not everyone holds the same ideals and worldview. As citizens living in such a purportedly enlightened society, we must learn to realize that freedom and personal choice are sacred and vital to the health of our nation.
The passage of the South Dakota law should serve as a warning to us. It should remind us that individual freedoms are too precious and fleeting to take for granted. Our rights quickly dissolve when citizens care too little to vote and politicians become presumptuous enough to believe that it is their right and duty to infringe upon those freedoms.
This is not merely an abstract illustration of national politics, but a lesson for students here at Skyline College. Why do so few care about local issues that directly affect courses, requirements, fees and even the very buildings of the campus itself? The apathy regarding student government is a truly alarming forecast on how current students will participate in the democratic process once out of school. We, as maturing adults, need to make sure the world knows of our presence by voting. Put forth some effort or else you and your lack of action will be utterly inconsequential and forgotten.
CON:Peter Sandoval
Our nation is divided in the never-ending argument of pro-life versus pro choice. After repetitive arguments, conflicts, bans, amendments, riots, etc., the view on abortion has been altered, swaying in both extremes like a broken metronome that never ceases to stop. Opposing sides distort the laws or offer biblical explanation for their extremist acts. The term pro-life has remained inconsistent with what it was defined years ago by our society. Having faltered from fetal life or the right to life and opportunity, it has also been distorted to discern life in women, and the choice to live with one’s freedom in medical practices and decisions.
The partial birth abortion is an atrocious act, often misconstrued with beautiful pictures of angels that descend to carry the baby to heaven to live happily ever after. Most of us however, have been left in hiatus, with the lights off on what it actually is. What is partial birth? Partial birth is the phase in which the fetus’s body is already outside the woman’s body with the exception of the head. In a partial birth abortion, the fetus remains in this phase, held by doctor’s gentle hand, so that a syringe can be inserted into the womb. This syringe is inserted behind the head of the infant towards the hindbrain, where a lethal injection of air is administered, flat lining the infant’s brain, causing death.
This practice is allowed in the first trimester of a pregnancy and no particular reason is objected, there does not have to be a reason, women have that freedom.
Roe v. Wade determined that a woman could have an abortion in the first trimester that laws can be placed to restrict abortion only if intended to save a woman’s life and that an abortion must still be available if a woman’s life is at risk.
Pro-life has always been seen as an anti-women force, which has fought to strip women of their right to their body. However, there isn’t just a woman, there’s the life of a fetus which is still argued, doesn’t exist until the twenty-second week where the fetus has a fully developed brain with all functions viable. What isn’t explained however is that the fetus can feel pain, pain as in ‘OUCH THAT HURTS, WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!’ A fetus’s central nervous systems can be fully developed by twelve weeks of the pregnancy, and can release hormones associated with extreme pain. They can feel everything from the voice of their mother, to the pat on her tummy, even a prick from a needle to the back of their head.
Women should never have their rights taken away for any reason; women already undergo the unfairness of sexism and discrimination that comes with their gender. An abortion is not just an easy way out, but a life and death situation. I’m not preaching or saying anything that hasn’t been said before. Contraception should be taken seriously because if we can be responsible for our bodies, than we must commit to our responsibilities to contraception.