Thoughts on Roe V. Wade Controversy

To preface this; 

Due to the nature of the controversy being discussed, I think it might be good to mention that I am a cis-male. While I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that men "Shouldn't have an opinion on the matter" or "Are wholly unimportant to the discussion", I think it's fair to say the crux of my argument stems mainly from the fact that nearly everyone is wholly unimportant to the discussion, so just a tidbit before I start. 

To begin, I'll layout my thoughts. In my humble opinion as some guy on the internet, I don't really see why everyone seems to think that in order to be pro-choice, you must "Support Murder" or "See no issue with killing children". I would be hard pressed to find anyone that I knew personally or even acquaintances of mine (That are pro-choice) that drooled in excitement over the actual act of an abortion itself. The point has always been about the rights of women in the country, and for some reason that is glossed over in a fair share of ignorant arguments from the pro-life crowd. To be fair, both sides make fairly ignorant arguments, but I'm not sure how you could seriously try to tell me that everyone who is pro-choice is subsequently also pro "child-murder?" I would say the argument comes from the conflation of the ideas, for example, in my personal opinion, my stance on the argument doesn't go further than "Can a woman have access to / rights to a safe medical procedure in what we all thought was a 1st world (and secularized) country?" See, the difference here is that I didn't have to go as far as the act itself. I'm not pro-child murder, I'm in fact pro-human rights, which makes me pro-choice by proxy. While we could sit here and argue when a fetus is a living, breathing, human, the truth is that children are grown in a woman's body, and I was under the impression that women had the right to control their own bodies, and make their own decisions with them. As a side note, can somebody provide me an example of someone who isn't verified to be insane that is advocating for late-stage abortions? I hear the argument but I never see it. I think it should be pretty obvious that women aren't trying to abort children 10 weeks from birth. Maybe I'm oversimplifying here, but I (Again) was under the impression that this was about the rights women have over their own bodies.

Of course, I am ignoring the elephant in the room here, Religion. One may say I am privileged to be non-religious in this situation, as I think it clouds the mind quite a bit in this specific conversation. I understand and respect the fact that you might not be too fond of the act of abortion due to religious beliefs, but I have something to tell you that might make this discourse a bit more understandable to everyone; Like I said earlier, I don't think anyone does. I know at least personally that I don't, and I think what I may and may not like isn't really all too important in this discussion. I don't have governance over anybody's body, and that's that. To be honest, I could just stop there. I think it's an absurd idea to backtrack in history and remove women's rights in the year 2022, but we all just watched it happen, and while the victory now to the pro-life crowd may seem glorious, I think my concern falls a lot more into the implications this could have. So, we're here, and somehow the supreme court drafts up documents under our noses (A plan that had to be leaked for us to know, at which point a lot of people thought it must be a hoax) and manages to just swiftly move forward with taking away women's access to safe medical procedures? Yes, I know that isn't actually what the supreme court did (They just relinquished the right to the states to determine what is and isn't legal) 

But the scary part of this is how fast everything moved; and how a lot of the actions of the supreme court were taken in a very non-secular way. We are living in a time where supreme court justices are advocating for a departure from the separation of church and state, and also in a time where supreme court justices are advocating for other human rights to also fall in lieu of this (referring to same-sex marriage specifically).  Even if you think this change of policy is a good one, are the later consequences of this not terrifying in the slightest?  I see this as a dying generation pushing for power while they still have the chance to. I have doubts that this policy will stay in place for too long after the last of the 60 to 70 year old justices have rotted and are replaced with slightly less unbearable people. If an organization such as this carries so much power that an executive order from the president was the response then I can't even begin to comprehend why they would be appointed for life. It is getting clearer and clearer that the generational divide in America is a large one, and as we progress further our generation is still being held back by people who can probably hardly recognize the America they live in today. 

Back to the topic at hand, I encourage you to ask yourself what expecting women will do now if they happen to live in a state where abortion is prohibited. No, you did not in fact stop abortion. If anything, you've probably just made it harder to reach and infinitely more dangerous. The coat hanger jokes of the past that everyone seems to have a fondness for are going to now come back in an all too real way, and its sickening. Of course, you might say, "Well, witchcraft, why can't they just take a road trip or a flight to one of their supporting states. It's just our state that isn't having this!" and I would say to you, how is it that you truly believe that these women are expected to plan trips to states that could be as many as 4 states away when the reasoning for the abortion is in most cases a lack of financial readiness? To make an example, if you find yourself wanting an abortion in the state of Mississippi, you are surrounded by states where abortion is banned, and you will be forced to travel to Florida where it is legal (for now) to have a procedure done, that probably will not be completely free of charge, and try not to forget you will also be planning a return trip, as well as hoping and praying that the job you have accommodates you maneuvering around state law to receive treatment. You have not "Saved children from murder". You have not "Made sure that justice prevailed!", or whatever other idea you subscribe to.  You just made it harder for people struggling already. If you think negatively about the act of abortion, I wonder if you have ever thought about what a woman has to go through when she makes that decision for herself. 

This is a blatant violation of women's rights and more importantly human rights. 

My stance is pretty strong on this one, but I am always open to respectful discussion. No, I don't hate you if you're pro-life. I'm not sure why the stance is called pro-life, since 1. That would imply that I am pro-death by default (Last I checked I wasn't) and 2. It completely misses the point of this discussion and also falls into the same issues as the statement of "All Lives Matter" but no, I do not hate you, nor will I completely close my ears to everything you have to say. I'm of the opinion that if we want to somehow organize the political situation in America, we need to set aside our differences and have real conversations about the gritty and grey areas, without the Dem or Rep goggles or the rose-tinted glasses of religion.

Anywho, see ya next time. Let me know how I did on my first (Of what will probably be many) Political SpaceHey blogposts.