Yes, yes. I should be writing a Criminology paper and getting to sleep (it’s currently 12:30 am). But… I was having a mental block and I’m not tired so I decided to write y’all another post instead. Two in one day! I’m on a roll… 🙂
My friend told me about this article in a universities newspaper. It was under the “Viewpoint” section, which I believe is sort of an opinion section for the paper’s writers.
It’s about abortion. In favor of abortion, of course!
The chick who wrote this is apparently very ignorant.
She opens up with the defeat of Mississippi’s Amendment 26. She explains it a bit, not doing it much justice. Then she states, “Thankfully, the Amendment did not pass.”
Thankfully. Of course!
She’s against it because of “the issue of rape.” Of course you are. This young author believes that if a woman was raped and was not allowed to have an abortion, that the child would be “a slap in the face” and that the mother would show nothing but “distaste” towards the child because it would be a constant reminder of that rape. She says something a little insane about a mother falling, and having a miscarriage, and being processed as a criminal… which I’m pretty sure was not the intent of the Amendment, but hey, I could be wrong… Then the article moves on to fertility treatment and claims that outlawing certain fertility treatments would ban couples from having children.
And here we go.
ISSUES with this article: Everything.
First off, of course it’s a pro-choice article. What institution would print a pro-life article commending Article 26? I wonder if I wrote to The Technician about the positives of this Amendment if they would print it? Highly doubtful.
Second. Her argument about miscarriages and criminal proceedings is awkward. I don’t think she has her facts straight, which is unfortunate. I can just see college students reading this, nodding their heads in agreement, unaware that the details of the Amendment have been skewed and blown out of proportions. And of course they won’t go read the Amendment for themselves, because hey! Someone’s already done that for them. Riiiiight…
Third. I completely understand that rape is horrible. No woman (or man) should ever have to suffer a trauma that horrific. However, it’s pretty selfish to want an abortion because that child would be a constant reminder of the rape. So an abortion is better, huh? Not only will the woman suffer one trauma (the rape) but then she’ll go endure another one having the abortion!! Now that’s horrific. And to call the child a slap in the face is just plain stupid. Get a grip author! You should be more intelligent than that.
Fourth. This argument is the worst of them all I think. “I am the result of numerous fertility treatments. Although I was born long before this became an issue, it still hurts to know that some couples who want children could be potentially banned from having children, should this become a law anywhere?” Well… I don’t think Mississippi will be banning people from having children. There is this thing called adoption. It’s a great thing to do. Instead of creating babies through science and illegitimate and unnatural means, maybe parents can help those that are already living? You know, save a life, give a child a better life and the opportunity to know unconditional love and what it’s like to have a family. Isn’t that was we as Americans stand for? Don’t we stand for happiness and opportunities? Apparently only to a fault.
Plus, I love that she titles it “Standing Up For Rights.” Whose rights? Not those of the innocent, defenseless child. Oh, the woman’s rights? What? Her right to kill an innocent, defenseless child? That’s not a right. That’s murder. And murder is just plain wrong.
Maybe I’m overreacting. Maybe I’m not. I just don’t think this is a necessary article for a university’s newspaper. If they’re going to publish a left-sided article it’s only fair that they should publish a right-sided, pro-life one. But they won’t, which is unfortunate.
And that’s my peace. Time for sleep.