Drowned out by all the rhetoric about the sanctity of life (Pro-Life), and the natural rights women have over their bodies (Pro-Choice), are deep issues of compassion and humanity, for children, for parents and for society.
According to a study by the Guttmacher Institute; “Forty-two percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level”. In other words, a substantial portion of aborted pregnancies occur in very low-income households. According to the report Expenditures on Children by Families 2009, from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the cost to raise a child to age 17 exceeds $220,000. Although it is likely much more for some, and far less for many, it’s probably a pretty fair representation of the middle.
The Guttmacher Institute further reported that: “The reasons women give for having an abortion underscore their understanding of the responsibilities of parenthood and family life. Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals; three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.”
But if the “sanctity of life” crowd gets their way they will criminalize the approximately 1.2 million abortions performed in this country each year. That is their real agenda, isn't it? And if by chance they succeed, what’s the potential fall out?
Ask yourself this? How many of these 1.2 million forced pregnancies will result in children living so far under the poverty level that they lead miserable childhoods, lives fraught with destitution, crime and violence? How many girls will have no choice but to become prostitutes? And how many of these forced births will end in their violent deaths, or possibly the sadistic torture of children and babies?
If you're on the fence about abortion ask yourself this. How many violent crimes against children are you willing to enable in the name of saving fetuses with no concept of their own mortality? Because a child at the mercy of a sadistic adult knows the meaning of death, and the terror associated with facing it. Are you really willing to put live, cogent defenseless children through that? I certainly don't want any part of this horrific act towards children, and shame on anyone who justifies otherwise.
And if by chance they do make it to adulthood, what burden will they place on society? How many people will have to be needlessly murdered by these grown up children who have been subjected to such extreme and persistent brutality and poverty that they take it out on society at large? How much will they cost us in increased crime, incarceration, and government subsidies? Oh, and let’s not forget about the ramifications in increased healthcare costs and death to pregnant mothers forced to seek abortions outside accepted medical practices. Not to mention the cost of "witch hunts" against doctors and patient privacy.
The fundamental problem with the Pro-Lifers is that they are simply unwilling to ascribe any downside whatsoever to the forced pregnancies they seek. To them life is sacred, at any cost. But it seems to be sacred to them only BEFORE birth. Where are they when these children are being abused, brutalized, murdered, or, surviving that, becoming transformed into hardened criminals who will perpetuate the cycle of violence resulting from the circumstance forced onto them by the Pro-Life agenda.
Pro-Lifers are fond of proclaiming that anyone having an abortion is somehow a sinner of the worst degree. Never mind that according to the Guttmacher Institute 65% of all women having abortions identified themselves as either Protestant or Catholic.
Here’s the stark reality. Human beings are called upon to make gut wrenching decisions all the time. That’s life. Parents must make calls about the care of their children all the time, which sometimes involves removing them from life support when there is no medical possibility of recovery. Children are often forced to make the same decisions about their parents. Parents-to-be often make impossible decisions about children with birth defects and other prenatal issues. There are even rare cases were expecting parents are forced to make life and death decisions between conjoined twins.
The vast majority of women who choose to terminate their pregnancies do so because, for one reason or another, they do not feel that they can properly care for a child. For most, this cannot be an easy decision. Aside from the termination of a live pregnancy, their pregnancy, women who make this decision often experience great feelings of guilt and remorse, sometimes permanently. So why do it? Why make such an emotional sacrifice?
Maybe it’s as simple as the fact that they are making the most profound decision any parent can make, the decision of whether are not to have children at all. In a society where many people expend great consideration on the decision to purchase a major appliance, yet view the decision to have children as the simple byproduct of having sex, maybe people who choose to defer having children until they can properly care for them are the truly responsible ones. Maybe forcing women to carry pregnancies who are not in a position to properly care for them is the real atrocity; to the child forced to endure an unnecessarily hard life, to the woman who has been rendered a slave to her reproductive system, and to society who must pay the heavy burden for millions of children forced to grow up at extreme risk.
Now there might be some justification in the Pro-Life position if they opened their homes and hearts to these children, including shelling out the $220,000 necessary to successfully raise each child, but most of the time that’s simply not the case. Oh sure, there are those occasional few who commit super-human efforts to saving at-risk children. And by all means they should be commended heartily for their extraordinary contribution to both the children and society.
But compared to the number of pregnancies where women and men do not feel ready to assume what is arguably their most important role, that of parent, the resources to successfully care for these children do not come near to filling the need.
There is, however, a way to solve this. According to various polls, about half of all Americans call themselves Pro-Life. That’s at least 50 million adults, versus 1.2 million abortions annually. All these Pro-Lifers need to do is agree to adopt every single child that might otherwise be aborted, and poof, problem solved. Or at the very least they could make a valiant effort to back up their rhetoric with genuine compassion.
Of course we all know that many of these babies aren't healthy, white little cherubs that are peaceful, well-adjusted infants with delightful little giggles, the apples of their mother’s eyes. Many are mixed race, medically challenged, malnourished, chronically screaming, often drug addicted babies who frequently test HIV positive at birth. Face it. Vast numbers of these babies are hardly suitable for your predominantly white, fundamentalist anti-abortion crusader.
Which makes one ask, who are the real villains here? Who are the true sinners? Those who responsibly make what is possibly the most profound decision we as humans are called upon to make; whether we are ready to provide the time, attention, love and investment necessary to raise a healthy, happy child who will grow into a productive, positive member of society. Or is it the self-righteous moralist who would rather doom innocent, helpless children to loveless lives of neglect at best, or at worst unspeakable terrors that turn them into unhappy, angry burdens to society, assuming they live that long.
So next time you run into an avid Pro-Lifer, ask them how many crack babies they’ve adopted! After all, that’s the real heart of the issue. Isn’t it?
