What “Pro-Life” Really Would Mean:

The term “pro-life” has focused so heavily on terrifying children with placards depicting aborted fetal remains, protesting loudly and sometimes violently at Planned Parenthood clinics, and even resorting to acts of domestic terror (see: Tiller, Dr. George) that haven’t even noticed how far from the actual meaning of that simple term construes. Simultaneously, many involved in the “movement” blinkered themselves so thoroughly, they’ve failed to realize that the organizations and political parties (mostly Republicans) largely could care less about Roe v. Wade — they’ve an issue about which voters whose professed views largely align with the views of others in their district, and they’ve exploited you folks for every last penny, phonebank, polling place intimidation, etc. You are nothing to most likely very many of these politicos than votes and dollar signs.

Someone who is actually “pro-life” would probably include in their professed beliefs:

  • Firstly, that all life is sacred, and should be given the opportunity to develop according to its path, as only the Creator can see. Therefore:
  • The death penalty should be abolished universally;
  • Planned Parenthood provides services specific to women’s well-being, up to and including abortion, and their services provide invaluable resources to which they might not have access
  • With regard to healthcare, it must be a right guaranteed to all, including food and shelter assistance, mental health care, child care and access to education and livable work.
  • Guns should be strictly regulated, and should be used for hunting or personal defense exclusively
  • Proven-effective vaccines must be administered universally at the proper time.
  • With every means available, climate change must be arrested and ideally reversed, to which end I, as pro-life, will contribute by reducing total energy output, investing in renewable technology and agitating for my municipality, county, state, etc. to do the same, as the global costs of climate change already end, disable or disrupt life.
  • As pro-life, I am ethically bound to oppose armed conflict in all cases, unless if — andonly if — that conflict direct affects my community, is ethically unacceptable (Holocaust, Rwanda, Rohingya) or if all other methods of conflict are exhausted. This obviously allows for community determinations of *what* those standards mean and how and when they should be applied. I am bound to demand emphatically any organization to which I have ties to divest from any organization just violates any of these principles.
  • As pro-life, I am ethically bound to take no part in the ending of another’s life, except in cases where I am left no choice. Depending on one’s preference or availability of natural resources, “another’s life” can and in many cases should include the lives of other living organisms.

That would be a more accurate description of any person who claims to be “pro-life.” Please ask elected representatives who claim this label merely for opposition to abortion how they stand on these matters, and please question vigorously anyone who defends the contradiction. This list is merely a suggestion, but a valuable one I hope, when, in our digitally manipulated world, catch-phrases and keywords distract attention and distort ratiocination to ill-considered emotional reactions.

Advertisements

~ by Benji on 10 December 2017.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: