The Republican Party would like you to think that the debate over their proposed anti-choice legislation (HR 3 and HR 358) is a debate about whether or not we should value life. Rest assured it is not; we all value life.
The debate is about a bedrock principle of our nation -- the fundamental belief that the rights and freedoms of an individual apply to all Americans, both women and men, and should be valued above all else.
Even those on the opposite side of the political aisle from me would agree that this nation was founded to give voice to the oppressed, to give full freedoms to every individual, and to free us from the constraints of the ideology of others.
As we all know, at the time of our nation's founding, this ideal was far from realized. African Americans were treated as property, and women weren't allowed to vote.
With great struggle we've righted these wrongs, and as a nation we have come to believe that men and women of every color and creed are created equal; that we are all entitled to the rights and individual freedoms at the core of our nation's ideals. With men and women of every background in positions of influence, from boardrooms to committee rooms, on sports fields and in outer space, this is more than a belief -- it's a way of life.
In valuing individual rights, our nation puts our trust in all citizens to solemnly decide the most important issues in their own lives. We do not legislate religions to follow, dictate politicians to represent you, nor decide where you live and what jobs you are worthy to hold. The founding glue of our nation is that free-willed individuals can, and should, be free to live life as they see fit.
Personally, when you are faced with a tough life decision, what do you do? Whether it is deciding where to go to college, how to support aging parents, or whether to enter into a lifelong commitment to the one you love, you more than likely take time to quietly reflect on your values, talk with friends and family, and listen to your conscience to arrive at a final decision.
Decisions like these are never easy. Many may disagree with your decision, and the process often tests your faith, challenges your beliefs, and fundamentally alters the path of your life. Yet, exactly because these decisions are so personal, so unique, and so important, we as a nation believe that the choice must be yours.
It is this freedom that I fight for today.
When applied to pregnancy, we have constitutionally protected the right for all American women to choose their own health-care options and develop a plan for pregnancy that is right for them. In part because women are instinctual nurturers, this is one of the most personal and important decisions that can be made. Whether it is in consultation with a partner, with friends and other loved ones, or in quiet reflection on one's own, this decision truly tests the conscience, beliefs and faith of all those involved.
It is the right to make this difficult choice free from the constraints of others that our Constitution guarantees. And although this constitutional protection is enshrined in Roe v. Wade, this right goes deeper than the paper it is written upon. It is grounded in the principle of equality for all Americans, and the fundamental right at the heart of the American experiment -- that every individual can decide to live their life based upon their conscience, their decisions and their beliefs.
Over the next few days and weeks I will try to share stories about the long struggle to achieve these equal freedoms for all Americans, and why it is important to continue to protect these freedoms for all Americans.
Today I want to take a moment to invite you, men and women alike, to join me, my colleagues, and millions of others Americans in the fight to make sure this equality and freedom to choose is never taken from American women and to guarantee that the right to choose your future is your own.
Rep. Slaughter can be reached at her Facebook page, via email, or through her district offices.
Follow Rep. Louise Slaughter on Twitter: www.twitter.com/louiseslaughter
The GOP and Tea Party are doing everything they can to reverse the above. THey seem to want things to go back to pre-civil war days
F/F
Women aren't forced to have babies. Women are guaranteed to make their own choice...but that choice cannot be referred to others for provision.
The time to for free choice is BEFORE you make the mistake; otherwise, the mistake is yours to handles however you choose. But taxpayers shouldn't be responsible for providing agencies and methods to fix someone else's mistakes!
If a woman decides to have a baby, then the baby is her responsibility to raise and nurture and provide for. It is not the responsibility of taxpayers or legislatures to hand out free food, services, and housing because the woman can't afford to raise a child on her own. Again, personal responsibility. Just because you WANT something, doesn't mean you should automatically get it, especially if you can't afford it or provide the proper upbringing.
As to capitalistic wars of choice...grow a brain. The draft was abolished almost 30 years ago. It's a VOLUNTEER military that we have now.
What is it with you lefties wanting to do whatever you want at the expense of others? Take responsibility! provide for yourself! Stop being a parasite on society!
How intellectually honest are you with defending human life?
And before you respond, remember, Donald Rumsfeld shook Saddam Husseins hand.
If someone denies you the right to do with your body what you choose to do with your body, they should be on the hook for all expenses...or butt out.
Remember when we would see these signs hanging in what seemed to be every other car window?
What happened to those? Well, my theory is that people began to ask themselves why they should drive more carefully around the signed car just because a baby was in it. The realization finally came that adults were just as valuable and babies need not be a special case. This, very indirectly, is where we are with the question of abortion.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/07/hbc-90005402
When the State intervenes to mandate life, is the State complicit in the decision to care for and nurture that life? Is the State complicit in the failure of the parent/parents to care for and nurture that life over the course of life after birth?
Does a fetus have individual Constitutional rights? Seems like the granting of any fetal rights would introduce a raft of legal complications, for example, if the parents refuse to accept responsibility can the State put the child into foster care immediately following birth? up for adoption, etc.
On the other hand, if a women has the right to terminate a pregnancy, what rights does the fetus have at termination? Ugliest cases: Can the woman harvest the fetus for commercial use? Can the women harvest the fetus for ritual use?
Actually we do this every day. If a woman decides to carry the pregnancy to term and the man doesn't want to be a parent, the state quickly intervenes to make sure that he does see through his obligations to support the child to the age of majority. Are you saying that you think men should be able to opt out of parenthood and it's responsibilities if they choose?
Suggestion: Everyone has to register as pro-choice or anti-choice on a state-wide register. If you move, you notify the state and they send your records to the new state. These will be sorted according to your economic status- richest people go first.
When a woman wants an abortion, but does not fall under rape, incest or peril of losing her life, she will apply to the register. If she registered as anti-choice, she is denied. If she registered as pro-choice, the first person on the anti-choice list will be asked to decide whether she can have an abortion. If yes, she gets an abortion. If no, the anti-choice person must immediately give 250,000.00 to the registry to hold for the woman in trust. The anti-choice person must pay her salary if she is unable to work, and all medical expenses while pregnant. After birth, she can choose whether to keep the baby, or give it to the person who denied her abortion. If she gives it up, they must adopt it and raise it as their own- no matter what it's race, sex, physical condition. If they are truly pro-life, they will love the child even if it is deformed or has FAS. If they adopt, they get half the money back, and the woman who carried keeps the other half.
Would this make you happy?
control over women (the big one)
you get to deny abortion to someone
you get to prove just how pro-life you are by raising the child you "saved"
We have thousands of people in prisons for making wrong choices. We show respect to their VICTIMS by punishing them for their irresponsible CHOICE.
Isn't it about time we start showing some RESPECT to the potential VICTIMS of abortion?
Simply because we have a right to choose doesn't mean the choice we make is right or good. At some point, we have to acknowledge the victims of abortion and their rights.
Judge not, lest ye be judged.
The victims of abortion don't feel anything, because 99% of them don't have brains yet. However, the victims of abusive parents, unstable households, or just plain abject poverty suffer way more!
Because either you believe that rape victims should be compelled to carry their attackers' babies to term, which is slavery, or you're willing to make an exception in the case of rape, in which case this has nothing to do with "saving innocent lives" and everything to do with controlling women's choices, which is also slavery.
You can certainly be personally opposed to abortion. You can even counsel others to choose life.
But if you want to use the force of law, then you are for enslavement, period.
I wonder how many in our prisons were unwanted children.
"Anti-Abortion" emphatically does NOT equal "Pro-Life".
"Pro-Choice" emphatically does NOT equal "Pro-Abortion".
"Pro-Life" implies support for preserving life of whatever species you are talking about, in these discussions, the human species. An individual who is "Pro-Life" is AGAINST taking human life. ANY human life. How many so-called "Pro-LIfers" are also pacifists? If you think you are "Pro-Life" and you are not a pacifist, then (a) you are a hyopcrite, and (b) what you are really saying is that you are "Pro-your opinion has higher value than mine". You are staking out a position where you say, "Yes, it is OK to kill, but only where I (or the government as my agent) says it's OK."
That's not a very strong moral position, people.
On the other hand, "Pro-Choice" does not imply "Pro-Abortion." It implies supporting the right of the individual to choose the fate of her fetus.
In reality, the abortion fight revolves around whether the government should retain the authority over when to permit fetus death, or whether it should delegate that authority to the pregnant woman. Nothing more, nothing less.
Note that in either case, the governnment retains the fundamental authority, even if it happens to delegate the right of decision to the woman, because, ultimately, it can always 'change its mind'.
And all this arguing over that.
Pathetic.
Pro-life does not have to support life in every case. Sometimes living entities can be harmful, destructive, or inappropriately violent, and in such cases the best way to minimize harm may be by killing the criminal. The pro-life position, in my opinion, is meant for innocent life, really. For me, it includes animals, and I've been a vegetarian for 20 years and maintain a farm sanctuary at my home. We each do what we can.
You rhetoric said, "Yes, it is OK to kill, but only where I (or the government as my agent) says it's OK."
I have no idea why you would consider it immoral to distinguish between killing those who are so innocent that they haven't even breathed air yet versus killing violent criminals to protect others from harm.
What crime did can a fetus commit that should disqualify it from protection under the law?
Once your body contains the body/fetus of another life within, it is no longer "just your" body. The courts have already acknowledged this fact when bringing murder charges against TWO when the victim is pregnant.
Women have the choice to not become parents if they're not ready to. Men do not have that choice. That's not really equality is it?
Add to that Safe Haven laws which are in effect in nearly every state and that's another avenue of opting out of parenthood that women have and men don't.
Or refrain from having sex. Like that would happen.
Yes we do. We can keep it in our pants.
"That's not really equality is it?"
Hmmm...let's see, I get to give up the final call on whether to terminate a pregnancy and in return I don't have to menstruate, suffer through labor pains, breast feed and I get to make $1 for every $0.70 a woman makes?
I'll take it.
I'm not saying that men should in any way be able to have a final call on what a woman does with her body or her pregnancy. But the title is "Equality is Choice" but when one gender has reproductive rights and the other does not, the situation is inherently unequal.
Women have the choice to abstain and if they don't, they have the choice to use contraceptives and if that fails, she has the choice to abort, and if she doesn't she has the choice to abandon the baby under safe haven laws or in many cases adoption.
Men have two of these options. Pretty firmly unequal.
I like how you talk about labor pains and breast feeding when the discussion is about how to opt out of those things.
Then the wage gap myth.....
The Republicans are hiding behind budget cutting to force a conservative social agenda.
Sure sounds like the defection approach of Karl Rove
Told my congressman--if you work and vote against choice, I work and vote against you--true and simple
I'm so heartened to be reminded that there are politicians who truly believe in protecting the American people, especially American women. We're under attack right now, and it's so easy to get discouraged.
Or shall I say I'm not taking away any of your rights...I'm just forcing you to undergo platelet phoresis for nine months to save some thrombocytopenic patient...that patient has the right to live, and no one's taking away your rights except for using only one of your organ systems against your will.
And, no, abortions make up a tiny portion of Planned Parenthood's activities and budget. And if you can be all high and might about your tax dollars and your precious fetuses, why do my tax dollars have to go to taking the lives of REAL human beings in foreign wars & drug raids?