Upfront. I am pro-choice and find it utterly contemptable that any group of male or female (mostly male) judges decide what will happen to a woman’s body. IT’S HER BODY and she, whoever she is, has a right to a private decision about what she does with her person regarding a pregnancy.
This topic was highly contentious in 1973 when the High Court judged in Roe v Wade that abortion was legal nationwide. That decision by SCOTUS is not only controversial today but also in danger of being overturned. The so-called POTUS is at this moment deciding on which people he will nominate for Supreme Court judges and they are likely to be anti-abortion. Trump himself had promised during his presidential campaign and recently in interviews that he will overturn Roe. (He infers that he alone can fix it.)
Numerous state legislatures have already passed laws that have weakened Roe and have highly restricted a woman’s right to make her own choices about a pregnancy. Certainly these legislatures and the people who support their decisions have reasons for restricting abortions. Many claim to be pro-life and contend that abortion is akin to murder. Trump, VP Pence, and Attorney General Sessions have all argued that a woman who aborts her pregnancy should be punished. They also argue that medical personnel who perform abortions should be charged with a crime. The underlying rationale for many is “personhood” or the concept that life begins at conception, when a single-cell organism—a zygote—is formed. Some even claim that birth control is a murderous act because contraception prevents a male sperm from fertilizing a female egg.
In my view, such “personhood” reasoning makes little sense. During a pregnancy there is the potential for a person to develop, but a zygote or embryo (early stage of pregnancy from two to nine weeks) is hardly a person with a functioning brain. A fetus has activity in parts of its brain as it develops and gradually matures. In short, pro-lifers, in my opinion, should advocate for children after birth when they are real live humans, many of whom have needs that their parents or caregivers are unable or unwilling to provide.
As someone who contends strongly that women should be free to make their own decisions about their bodies, I am also pro-life. I am FOR protecting lives that are endangered by racism, bigotry, inhumane government policies, hateful political groups, and an apathetic public. Some signs that abortion rights may still be protected are the politicians who adamantly oppose nominating a person to the High Court who advocates dismantling Roe. Republican Senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski have said repeatedly that they would oppose any nominee who would consider overturning the ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalizes abortion. And according to many polls, most Americans do not want Roe overturned.
Lawrence Tribe stated it well: “Too few people realize that Roe v Wade is a two-sided coin. It protects a woman’s liberty to choose whether or not to bear a child. Relegating that choice to the state isn’t a PRO-LIFE move but an ANTI-LIBERTY move. If a state can say “stay pregnant” it can also say “abort!”