Every woman should have agency over her body.
Every. Single. Woman. Should have the ability to choose what happens inside her own body. Ideally, the decision of whether or not to continue a pregnancy should be between the woman and her partner. But let us not be naïve to the fact that many women do not have a partner to accompany them when evaluating an unplanned pregnancy, thus leaving her to weigh these decisions on her own. The least we can do is offer her the comfort, safety, and council of a licensed medical professional.
It’s interesting being a 24-year-old woman in the midst of legislation like that of S.B. 8 in Texas, also known as The Texas Heartbeat Act, which effectively outlaws abortions and offers bounties of $10,000 to anyone that acts as a whistleblower. I won’t speak for women in the latter years of life because I’ve yet to experience them; however, this bill feels exceptionally personal to any woman of childbearing age. While I don’t live in Texas, thousands of 24-year-old women do – women who no longer have a choice over what happens to their own bodies.
For women, we take away their right to choose. For men, we…leave them be.
The part that continues to shock my system – literally reverberate through my body – is that a man who impregnates a woman (it takes two to tango) can choose to walk away. Adios. See ya. Bye bye. A woman, on the other hand, must stay; she must assume total responsibly for the actions of two. If Texas legislators agree that a fetus is a person at 6 weeks, where in S.B. 8 does it outline the commencement of child support at 6 weeks? Where in the bill does it include language that allows women to insure the 6 week fetus and collect if she miscarries? It doesn’t exist. In cases where a woman’s partner is not present, she is now forced to have the child, decide whether or not to raise the child, navigate the trauma associated with pregnancy, motherhood, adoption, and post-partum on her own (not to mention the financial burdens attached to giving birth).
Texas’ new abortion ban overwhelmingly addresses the role of a woman and the potential repercussions if she undergoes a (now illegal) abortion; however, the bill completely omits mention of the male counterpart, placing all responsibility on the woman. Why are men continuously left out of the conversation as if women impregnate themselves? Where are the legal ramifications for a man who impregnates a woman that later seeks an abortion? In this bill, the mother, medical professional, and every individual that aids her in receiving an abortion are held wholly responsible. But the impregnator? We hear no mention of him.
So Texas, if you are going to remove a woman’s ability to choose, then you must also place irreversible legal responsibility on the impregnator. Otherwise, it feels highly personal – less of an anti-abortion policy and more of anti-women legislation. Like a big middle finger to every woman that may have chosen differently if given the chance.
Common arguments used by anti-choice individuals.
What follows are common arguments used when advocating for abortion bans. By no means is it an exhaustive list; however, it includes rationale that I hear most often.
1. Don’t have sex before marriage.
This is a beautiful sentiment and honorable principle. However, if we look around, it hasn’t held up. People aren’t remaining abstinent. It does no good to base our beliefs – and perhaps more dangerously, our policies – solely on principle if they don’t hold true in practice. There is little to be gained living in a world other than reality. As such, rebuttals like “don’t have sex before marriage” are futile
2. I’m pro-life and against the murder of innocent fetuses.
As a writer, I consider words to be incredibly powerful. Similarly, I find it necessary that we are intentional with our language. Are you pro-life or are you pro-fetus? Let’s not answer in what we want to be. Rather, let our actions – the way we vote and the legislation we back – answer for us. For example, if you claim to be pro-life but deny bills that offer affordable healthcare coverage, vote to limit access to programs like WIC, food stamps, and free or reduced lunches, or exclude specific demographics from adoption eligibility, those are not homogenous actions.
If you are pro-life, you must be pro-life for the duration of the living’s life. If you are pro-life, you must be pro-life despite the ethnicity, race, sexuality, religious beliefs, political stance, or legal status of the living (and its parents). If not, you are merely in favor of a fetus up until it takes its first breath.
3. I don’t want my tax dollars going towards organizations like Planned Parenthood.
I find it comical when individuals that are anti-abortion protest against organizations like Planned Parenthood which serves as some people’s only access to affordable birth control and contraceptives. By offering affordable birth control and contraceptives, Planned Parenthood is reducing the likelihood of unplanned pregnancy thus limiting the number of women seeking abortions. Individuals who aim to permanently shut Planned Parenthood’s doors cut off access to affordable care and contraceptives, making unplanned pregnancies exponentially higher. It’s similar to high school’s teaching abstinence as the only form of effective birth control: it’s asinine. If you are anti-abortion, you do not want women unintentionally pregnant. A viable first step in preventing unplanned future pregnancies is to make birth control and contraceptives available at no cost to everyone.
At the end of the day, I believe that every woman should have full agency over her body. The decision of whether or not to continue a pregnancy is deeply personal. There isn’t and has never been space for government involvement. Until men are held to the same standard as women, I will not stop advocating for women’s rights in a world that plays by men’s rules.