This is one of those issues that many people feel very emotionally
passionate about one way or the other. So, let us try to look at the topic a little more objectively. In today's world,
every man and woman (or boy and girl) know there are several possible outcomes after having sexual intercourse. Long
after any pleasure has faded, and ignoring any emotional issues, each could have contracted a sexually transmitted disease
(STD) and/or the female could become pregnant.
As talked about in several of the other positions we hold, each of us has to be accountable
for our decisions. And, for someone to get pregnant from having sexual intercourse several decisons were made by the
parties. The two most important to a possible child as an outcome are: 1) two people choosing to have sex 2) use or
non-use of an effective contracepive of some type.
I think, particularly for those that are unmarried, it is preferred by most that
abstinance would be the best decision, but knowing that is not the choice many people are now making what else would be viable?
With the serious STD's infecting our society, why would anyone risk unprotected sex unless they know that they thier partner
is safe, and, that if they use no contraceptive, they are prepared to become pregnant and have a child.
Decision number 1. Condoms are very effective for reducing the chance of an unwanted
pregnancy, and contracting an STD, so, if you choose not to require your male partner to use a condom - it was your
decision - live with it!
Decision number 2. With the widely available methods for greatly reducing the chance
of an unwanted pregnancy, like condoms, IUD's, diaphragms, routine oral contaceptives, and 'morning after' contraceptives,
you must choose one if you plan to have sex and not become pregnant. If you decide to not use one of the contraceptive methods
and get pregnant, it was your decision - live with it!
Choosing among those methods of not becoming pregnant is a free choice, but only the person
involved in making that decision is responsible for providing that choice. It is not the government's responsibility
to provide those free of charge, or is it proper to require any insurance to be forced to provide that contraception solution.
Contraception is an 'elective' choice, and is the responsibility of those choosing it.
Now, with all of that said, someone makes one or two bad choices, and now becomes pregnant
and wants to abort a child. I do not support letting someone make a second or third bad choice except in the very specific
cases of forceable sexual intercourse, where the 'morning after' treatment was tried but not successful, or if carrying
the baby to term would cause a serious medical risk to the mother. Any child carried into the third trimester deserves the
chance to live on this earth, and I feel no abortion, except in the dire consequence of an almost certain death of the mother,
should be legal.
Obviously I would support the current court ruling and can understand why they ruled as
they did, but I think the current ruling condones the continued making of poor reproductive decisions. Giving someone
the ability to 'murder' the outcome of decisions that people make is a bad concept and should be eliminated. Third trimester
abortions should be illegal except in rare cases of a mothers imminent death !!!!!!
