Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 45 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

A Right to Life/Freedom of Choice Solution Everyone Can Live With

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   1 comment
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Steven Mitchell
Become a Fan
  (1 fan)
Humans need to redefine the value of life and its foundations

Humans (both men and women) should be supported financially to be able to bring a baby to term and up for adoption. If people are pro-life they ought to pay to support the 'right-to-life.' If you believe in the end of abortion, and yet also a woman's right to choose her own destiny, in spite of short-term mistakes, poor judgement, or bad anchoring lifetime decisions that she might have made (such as keeping a child to raise), then you should also be an advocate of government-sanctioned support for those pregnant women bringing a child to term. It should be a woman's right to make decisions, that aren't based on punishing her for the mistakes that she has made. We want people to improve not to get even or see them punished for things some of us consider misdeeds. There are those who believe a woman should suffer from the consequences of her decision to allow a man to impregnate herwhether through personal failure of her own, a failure of the man to fulfill his promises in a consensual arrangement or circumstances of uncertain permissions, a sexual attack that was uninvited, a forced circumstance in which the female froze in fear, or a female's submission to outright intimidation and force by a male or group of them. There are many people that believe that an unborn child a fetus is still that of a full human life. That, because it ends up as a living being, if able to survive to that end, taking it prematurely, is unjust to the unborn, unhatched organism that can ultimately evolve into a child. However, those same people have selfishly decided that they won't support the costs of having those babies brought to birth. The opponents of abortion, are just as guilty of failure to support fetuses to reach birth maturity and post-birth maturity, as those mothers who choose termination prior to the fetus's transition to become a terrestrial human child. If you want to be pro-life, then you should be prepared to pay for it, and advocate for the fetus's continuation. You should also be prepared to pay for your moral beliefs financially. To not do so, is entirely hypocrisy and contradiction. It is also by its outcome, 'A Solution Everyone Can Live With.' Isn't it?

In a 21st century world, a woman should not be strained in her financial circumstances. She should be supported in a comfortable environment, that includes prenatal care and post-partum care, to facilitate her health and recovery from the trauma of giving birth. She should not have to work if she so chooses. The mother should also be entitled (if you want the baby to live a good life) to psychological care pre-natal and post-partum.

She also should be guaranteed reentry back into the system. It is enough for a woman to be derailed from her life and agenda by an accidental occurrence. But it is doubly worse that both the women's' lives are upended by motherhood, as a result of irresponsible fatherhood, who doesn't have to function as a vending machine for nine months, but is doubly wrong to make the woman be the sole impacted member of that collaboration. So, if members of society want to end fetal termination than they should welcome the idea of paying for its political-economic-social solution of the costs associated with birth. Humanity needs to move forward in its accommodation with the human network and its performance.

Woman who bring children to term, especially happy, healthy children into the world, are delivering an important human function. They are providing the jet stream of human genetics and continuation with their labor and should be rewarded. Certainly, that should be the standard to strive for, especially in the affluent West, where its valuation of life, has to be altered from vengeance and retribution to mutually constructive cooperation.

Brought to you by Ideas and Stuff: Humanizing Solutions for Political Problems

Rate It | View Ratings

Steven Mitchell Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter Page       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

I worked as a community activist starting in my late teens in the latter 1970s on issues such as redlining, segregation, mortgage availability, education and redistributing utility costs (largely by trying to eliminate discounts to bulk (more...)

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

New York State's Newly Revised Election Law Changes are Cosmetically Convenient and a Democracy Sham

Today's Brief Announcement from the White House on the Direction of the Economy

A Right to Life/Freedom of Choice Solution Everyone Can Live With

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend