Roe V. Wade: Can We Stop the Reruns? Please?

Here's the text of an e-mail I sent to one of the correspondents who claim to have their knickers in a twist about yet another proposed bill that has something to do with surgically induced abortions. Short version: Feh.

"
Exactly at the time I became old enough to read such news, Roe v. Wade established an "unenumerated right to privacy" that banned abortion bans. This is no longer news. Pro-abortion or anti-abortion debates have been generating heat not light ever since and they are boring, boring, BORING. They go down a dead-end road to "Are you Catholic or not?" I respect people's right to be Catholic; I'm not Catholic. I believe abortion is neither morally nor medically sound, so I didn't have one. Others can make that choice for themselves too.

I'm more concerned about murders of babies or of their mothers by reluctant fathers than I am about abortions by reluctant mothers. If you assume an either-or choice, which usually does not exist in the real world, then yes, I value women higher than fetuses. I also think valuing women is a valid reason to teach girls that abortion is not an option they should consider for themselves. But pro-abortion versus anti-abortion reruns merely distract attention from that.

To interest me in anything remotely associated with abortion issues you'd have to move beyond the lame old twentieth century arguments and consider things that are at least fresh:

(1) Tweaking sex education back to its original purpose. "This is how people make babies. It is what you should NEVER do if you don't want babies. All the other ways people express affection and pleasure are 'better' when they don't start unwanted babies, including playing Scrabble if that's what comes to their minds, not even to mention all the other things that are likely to come to your minds after you've played a few rounds of Scrabble with the Significant Others you will eventually meet. When people under the age of eighteen are present we can focus on Scrabble." Seriously, I like what Joycelyn Elders said, but I agree with those who think she said it in more explicit terms than would be appropriate for a sixth grade class discussion. Teenagers should find and read her book for themselves.

(2) Encouraging more adoption and fostering of children, including older children, including singles as foster parents for teens with profiles that suggest problems for opposite-sex foster parents. Being a custodial foster sister was my big coming-of-age experience and has worked for other big sisters/brothers too. Foster care in a single-sex household, especially if that household has access to a better school environment and/or job opportunities, can prevent teen pregnancies. More social support for the reality that some people form single-sex households in order to practice abstinence, rather than homosexuality, might help both babies and teenagers grow up in supportive, ethical home environments.

(3) Recognizing that among the other harmful effects glyphosate has on all living things, it can cause abortion, problem pregnancies, and/or birth defects. For a minority of pregnant females of all species, glyphosate is an abortifacient. Instead of fretting about people who choose abortion (counsellors say it's more often the man's choice than the woman's), consider the people who really want to keep their babies and aren't able to, because someone in their neighborhood is too lazy to dig up a dandelion!

Or share your own strategies for reducing the incidence of abortion, if you really want to save the life of a fetus that might have become a baby somewhere. But, meanwhile, I delete pro-abortion and anti-abortion e-mail.
"