I decided back when I reinvigorated this blog that I would keep it to socially and educationally relevant issues that were passionate points of interest to me. To that end, since my last posting, nothing has really piqued my interest (or my blood pressure) other than the resurgence in popularity of the persisting argument between the pro-life and pro-choice advocates that has resurged after damning hidden videos were released suggesting that Planned Parenthood (a government funded clinic that offers, AMONG MANY OTHER SERVICES, lower cost abortions) has been selling body parts of aborted fetuses.
This blog post has nothing to do with those videos. This blog post has nothing to do with defending or vilifying Planned Parenthood for (what looks like) very illegal and repugnant business practices.
This blog post will address neither.
This blog post will address my whole problem with the "pro-life" movement.
Now, before you lose your cool (or your previously positive opinion of me), hear me out.
I was born and raised as a Roman Catholic. My parents- one a "cradle Catholic" and the other a converted member of the Presbyterian sect- raised me in the church, and as such, made sure I was engendered into a Catholic school system that begot my reception of the Sacraments in addition to a holistic Catholic education. Simply put- in 12 years, I received rigorous instruction in all core subject areas as well as Catholic Church history, dogma, and tradition. I am very well versed in Catechism, the varying results of ALL of the Ecumenical Councils, and what each pope from the past 3000 years did for the Catholic Church. Bottom line- I know what I am talking about as it relates to Catholicism.
One of the first things I EVER remember learning (after the pine cone bird-feeder and the clothespin pencil cup) was that abortion was wrong. At a young age, all we were told was that abortion was, "when a mom decided to kill her baby before it is born," and that as a faith community (and really with that description, HUMANITY as a whole) did not agree with that 'action'; in fact, it was a sin and something to be hated and feared.
In fact, when I was in 6th grade, I got in trouble at lunch for raucous behavior, and when I finally sat down with the principal at St. Pius X at the time, she specifically told me that my actions suggested I was on a very immoral and slippery slope of decision making that suggested I would end up having an abortion. In my experience, abortion was used as a weapon of shame, guilt, and fear.
However, after I left St. Pius, I moved on to my high school years at Bishop Lynch (in Dallas), and apart from Pro-Life Week fundraisers and awareness, I can't really remember the same association being made between behavior and immoral activity. At any rate, the overall point I am getting at here is that my background and history in this subject leans VERY pro-life.
Unfortunately (I say that to the overall Catholic upbringing I received...it will make more sense in a second), I went to college. And then graduate school. And in the almost seven years I spent completing them both (it took seven because of certification completions and whatnot), I met a LOT of people. A. LOT.
I met Christians and I met Muslims; I met Catholics and I met Atheists; I met pro-life enthusiasts and I met pro-choice enthusiasts; I met Conservatives and I met Liberals; I met Republicans and I met Democrats; I met moral literalists and I met moral relativists; I met the very wealthy and I met the very poor; I met the very educated and I met the very ignorant; I met those who prefer creamy peanut butter and I met those that prefer crunchy peanut butter. Imagine the most common extremes of anything, and I met them both.
And I am here to tell you personally that an interesting thing happens when you meet someone so different from yourself- (if you're open to their ideas) you start to see how your way of thinking functions in the greater context of our country and our world, and you also start to see how and why those people that are different from you think and process the very same things you do...and why their perceptions result in such different actions and behaviors.
If you ever have taken a second to truly listen to someone who is different from you, it really isn't that hard to relate to their thought process. We all have baggage and prior experiences; the difference between "us" and "them" is really more related to geography and time than anything else.
So, basically, after the experiences I had in college and graduate school, I found myself, for the first time EVER, in my life, not only relating to but UNDERSTANDING the plight of an individual that had an abortion.
When you are discussing the impossibility of the future with an individual who was bearing the entire weight of her family (and their future prospects because of the specific parameters of her LULAC Club scholarship) on her shoulders, who got pregnant after being date raped at a fraternity party (a situation I am similarly familiar with) that she didn't even know WAS actually a date rape (because she was never taught or warned by anyone of note OR her school district), it felt impossibly unfair to judge her decision without considering the context. Not just what options she knew she had, but also all of the other options she never knew she did. She went through the fear and despair of a pregnancy she didn't plan for (because of rape), nor was she ever taught how to deal with such a thing if it ever came to be.
So she visited her campus clinic, and was given her TWO options. Have it or abort it; she still had time to terminate the pregnancy before it was too close to term.
So this person-- this STRANGER-- that was willing to share her story, terminated her pregnancy because she was RAPED (though she refused to call it that because she took the blame on herself), by a man that she had only met ONE TIME because she had always been taught that individuals that rely on welfare are (borderline) criminals; she chose the abortion over life of that child. A life, she could only see going forward, would live a relatively bleak existence.
For everyone in this scenario that considers themself pro-life, this should be a point of interest and contention. She still CHOSE to abort her pregnancy, despite...well, what exactly?
Was she ever given an option or possibility outside of being a mother or aborter? No. Was she ever given information about how to pursue adoption for her child over and above abortion? No. Was she treated with kindness and understanding when she tried to explain the parameters of her situation, and why she was having a hard time? No. Was she a product of a system at universities or otherwise where impregnated women are of the understanding their options are motherhood or abortion? YES. Was she a patient at Planned Parenthood? NO.
So there is a multifaceted problem here. Abortion alternatives are not widely suggested, offered, or endorsed by collegiate and minute clinics (that I at least know of). Beyond that, the culture that drives our world does not widely espouse those alternatives. COUNTLESS couples will tell you about their adoption journey; how hard, impossible, and EXPENSIVE it is. However, the supply of women with unplanned pregnancies has not waned. So what is the problem? IF our culture will widely accept that abortion is MURDER, why is it not easier or more palatable for a woman to pursue her pregnancy in ways other than in abortion?
Case in point-- this story here. This is a fantastic example that acutely explains the nuances of pregnancy, birth, the notion and need of family, and how our culture deals with the inconvenience of LIFE, all the while persisting in advocation of BIRTH. We will bully women into thinking that having a child is the only way, but then scoff at and judge them for relying on government assistance to support children that were unplanned for.
How is it possible we are so adamant about protecting the life of a growing child, but not the environment or world they will absolutely inherit and run in the next 18 years? How is it that WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE only see choosing "life" as an option at impregnation, and NOT enduring sustenance after birth as the way of God? Jesus clothed the poor, fed the hungry, and embraced the forgotten; our culture insists we birth babies that will ultimately fall into that category. Help me understand why we espouse one and not the other? Real, pro-life individuals understand that life, yes, begins at conception; however, that same life, requires attention well beyond those days, usually in the form of government assistance and welfare. You, truly, cannot have one without the other. Yet, too many people are quick to insist that women should ALWAYS choose the pregnancy, but are just as quick to suggest that reliance on welfare and social programs is an indication of laziness, indifference, or fraud.
In all the time I have had to consider, process, and develop my opinion on this issue, I am still left unsure and divided on my beliefs. I absolutely believe in and encourage women to have their babies (even those that are as a result of disastrous circumstances); however, I will never judge a person for making such a different decision than I ever would. I am OK with having different moral direction than the popular sentiment; problems arise when proponents of one side of the issue believe their- oft times narrow and protracted- opinion is the only one that matters. Because, regardless of where you stand, anyone that suggests that this is a black and white, completely cut and dry issue is incredibly misguided and two dimensional. As with all issues that ride a line between social justice and morality, we would ALL be better served to pray for the grace we need to show love and understanding to our brothers and sisters.
