My thoughts on abortion (after the NY abortion bill was passed)

I just need to get some of this out of my head. It makes me incredibly sad thinking about this.

First, some background. The state of New York just passed a bill allowing abortions up until birth. There are some stipulations around it. The bill states that it can only be done in cases where the mother's life or health is at risk or the fetus is not viable. It goes on to explain that "health" encompasses age, economic, social, and emotional factors. Essentially, if the argument can be made that the would-be mother might face some negative consequences, the abortion can take place any time before full birth. It also removes the restriction that doctors must perform the abortion and opens it up to midwives and physicians assistants.

The abortion debate has really centered around two viewpoints. "Pro-life" advocates are against abortion because they view the unborn child as a human and feel it is wrong to end its life. "Pro-choice" advocates argue that the whole debate starts and ends with a woman's right to choose since she is the one carrying the baby.

The arguments have caused a polarization. A key element has become trying to define when the unborn child should be considered human. Everything from conception to birth is argued. There is no consensus here. Some argue that sentience should be the determining factor, but that isn't clean. For example, if lack of sentience is the standard, people in a coma should be considered non-human. Some argue that full-term and birth should be the line, but what about all the healthy people that were born before full-term. Under this interpretation it would have been legal to kill them, when they clearly would have survived had they been given the chance, as evidenced by the fact that they are alive. Suffice it to say there is no consensus here and both sides feel justified by their own definition. Not that useful in my opinion.

Back to the two main viewpoints -- wrong to kill babies vs. womens right to choose. My experience is that these two are nearly always portrayed as competing truths which cannot coexist. If I think abortion is wrong I am labeled as a sexist anti-feminist bent on subjugating women. If I think abortion should be allowed, I am labeled as a bloodthirsty baby-killer with no conscience. Yikes. I don't think I'm either one of those, nor do I think the vast majority of people fall into either of those definitions.

Ok, on to what I do think and believe. I hate the terms pro-life and pro-choice and forcing everyone to choose one bucket or the other. The world is not so black and white. Allow me to explain a little.

I believe I am a feminist. I love the steps we have taken in recent decades in regard's to women's rights. I love that the wage gap is closing. I love that most jobs are available to both sexes. I love seeing more and more women in prominent positions. I have deep respect for women who sacrifice so much of themselves to be excellent mothers. I know that is in no way an easy endeavor.

I am not a militant feminist. I don't believe we have to demonize men in the name of respecting women. In fact, I believe that demonizing any group in the support of another group is self-defeating in the long run. Tearing down something/someone elevates no one. It only looks relatively better which is fools gold. I believe both men and women have amazing things to offer.

My logic is similar concerning pro-life and pro-choice. I believe in the sanctity of life and in preserving the ability to choose. Most on the polar ends of the abortion debate insist I pick a side here, but I can't. I firmly believe it is wrong to take life because I believe so strongly in the ability to choose. When I end a life, I remove all ability of that other person to choose. My agency cannot supersede the agency of someone else. If I supersede someone's agency by coercion, I believe I am in the wrong.

My opinion on abortion is consistent with this logic, but I'd like to dive a little deeper. I don't believe I, or anyone else, has the right to choose to end the unborn child's life. That is agency superseding agency. This begs the question, "What about the woman's agency?" Fair. I will attempt to explain.

If I choose to throw a ball into the air, it's going to come down. If I choose to drive my car into a lake, it's going to sink. If I choose to eat fast food for every meal, I'm going to gain weight (and likely have other health issues). If I choose not to brush my teeth, my breath is going to stink and my teeth will eventually rot. If I choose to buy a new TV, money is going to be taken from my bank account. You get the point.

I get to make choices. I do not get to choose the consequences, as nice as that might be. In the last case, if I chose to "buy" a TV but then chose not have money come out of my bank account, we call that stealing. It's frowned upon.

This is similar to how I view abortion. You get to make the choice to have sex. You do not get to choose the consequences of that choice. I'll get to outlier cases like rape a bit later. Some people argue that protection/contraceptives were used and they still got pregnant, so clearly they didn't want a child from the start, so they should be able to abort it. That doesn't change the fact that you knew before you had sex that getting pregnant was a possible outcome, even if a small one. The choice was to have sex. The consequence is you got pregnant. You get to choose. You do not get to choose the consequences.