|
Gray Matter
The April 29 editorial stated that abortion is a black and white issue with no shades of gray. In fact, there are all sorts of shades of gray, as well as contradictions in the body of federal and state law, regarding abortion and related issues of the legal status of a fetus.
When negligence or acts of violence cause harm to a fetus, there are often legal avenues for prosecution of the parent or other party that caused the harm. For example, a woman whose drug or alcohol abuse injures or kills her unborn child can be and often is prosecuted. Third parties who accidentally or intentionally harm or kill a fetus can face criminal and/or civil penalties. In these cases, the fetus seems to be regarded as a human being whose rights have been violated. Yet, the court that made abortion legal in the United States established the arbitrary and biologically indefensible commencement of human “life” to be the moment of birth.
So it seems that a woman can choose to kill her fetus via a medical procedure, but she cannot do so in any other fashion. So much for black and white, not to mention the woman’s right to make decisions about her body.
Furthermore, in black and white terms, abortion is not about the rights of the woman’s body; it is about the rights of the body of her unborn child. Every woman in this nation has the legal right to avoid pregnancy through a multitude of safe, inexpensive, and effective means of contraception. Remember that the science of contraception was in its infancy in 1973, the year of the Roe vs. Wade decision. Times have changed, and pregnancy is much more avoidable now, but obviously many women are less motivated to be diligent about contraception due to the ready availability of abortion procedures and society’s acceptance and even glorification of abortion. One could argue that abortion is one of many examples in our society of individuals failing to accept responsibility for their actions and their choices. Perhaps it is this freedom to choose to avoid pregnancy that leads to some of the confusion regarding the meaning of Pro-Choice.
Sadly, those who support this type of choice, but who cannot ignore the fact that abortion ends a human life, are mocked and derided by publications like Metro Pulse as well as by individuals who pose as high-minded protectors of women’s rights. The woman’s right to choose has been a very effective mantra of those who want to ensure that abortion remains legal, readily available, and socially acceptable.
A Pro-Life stance is regarded by many as the epitome of un-cool, a dead giveaway that one is ultra-conservative and probably a religious fundamentalist. Pro-abortion has been packaged as a necessary component of a liberal, enlightened philosophy. In reality, there are many who are politically liberal and fiercely defend women’s rights but who cannot accept that a civilized society would condone the intentional killing of a human fetus. Equating Pro-Life with anti-women’s rights is much like equating opposition to war with contempt for military personnel.
I doubt that many participants in Pro-Life rallies really expect to see a reversal of Roe vs. Wade in our lifetime. Mandatory waiting periods on the order of three days, parental notification of abortion intentions by a juvenile, and other “erosions” of abortion rights are intended to provide an opportunity to reconsider the decision to abort, in hopes of saving at least some of the four million lives that are ended prematurely each year in this country. Likewise, I doubt that many participants in rallies in support of abortion really expect an effective challenge to the legality of abortion. The marketing of abortion has been so effective as to intimidate many of those who find it abhorrent.
If nothing else, public displays of Pro-Life sentiment can encourage others to speak their minds and to feel less pressured to end a life when their partners, co-workers, friends, or relatives respond to the news of a pregnancy with the all-too-common: “You are going to have an abortion, aren’t you?”
Patrice Cole
Knoxville
A VAT of Worms
Pause for a moment and take a look at the people around you. Probably most fall somewhere in the lower- to upper-middle class—or at least, that is the response most Americans will give when asked for their status in American society. The fact of the matter is, though, that this class, the middle class, is shrinking and will indeed continue to recede more rapidly if Bush has his way.
Consider the latest proposal for solving the national debt, which is to charge a national sales tax, similar to what the Europeans call a VAT (Value Added Tax) that is currently about 1 percent in European countries. The worst part about a VAT is that it is regressive. A regressive tax causes everyone to pay more for the basic necessities in life—food, clothing, shelter—not to mention entertainment. The greatest irony of all is that the moneyed interests, the ones who are least affected by such a tax, because paying an extra 15 or so percent in tax is only pocket-change when you have millions, do not even realize that this kind of tax does more in the long run to hurt their own interests. How, you ask? Let me explain.
Imagine that a VAT is passed. Who will suffer the most from this type of regressive tax? The poor certainly, the lower classes definitely, and the middle class undoubtedly. [Their] purchases can and often do result in important contributions to the growth of the economy. And who benefits more from an upturn in the economy than, of course, the wealthy.
As I stated above, the wealth of the economy is created by workers and purchases made by those same workers, the middle and lower classes who are bearing the burden of paying more and more taxes while the rich pay virtually none. That is wrong. Who is to blame? I voted for Bush. I admit it—and I regret it. I will not—cannot—make the same mistake again. The members of Congress and the Senate have a duty to restructure the tax system to ensure the fair payment of taxes by everyone who benefits from living in the United States. It is, after all, an American right—that is, justice.
Julie Hendrix
Knoxville
Missing Links
I enjoyed Thursday’s [April 29] Metro Pulse, but I’m amazed at the “Best of Knoxville 2004.”
You say your “categories honor everything from businesses that meet our fundamental need to...” However, you didn’t even have a category for two of the most important retailers—the community pharmacy (like Long’s) and the hardware store (like Parker Brothers).
Hope this oversight is corrected next year.
Bud Albers
Knoxville
May 13, 2004 • Vol. 14, No. 20
© 2004 Metro Pulse
|
| 
