CommentsEASTSIDER-All the pro-life “heartbeat” laws are being discussed as a matter of law. They’re not. They are religion masked as a legal issue.
Growing up around Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Evangelical Christian groups like the Assembly of God, the Southern Baptists, the Lutherans, the Presbyterians, and Billy Graham disciples like the Pentecostals, mostly down in Orange County, you learned not to kid them about their brand of God. Made the Roman Catholics look mellow.
Not a lot of humor, just a burning unbridled belief in saving the rest of us. And in some cases, evangelical voters rooting for End Times and the Rapture. Such as Vice-President Pence. You might want to take a look at the link to see what it’s all about.
That’s ok, whatever floats your boat. As long as you don’t try to use the government to force your beliefs on the rest of us.
To me, that’s why the discussion over abortion is so toxic. It’s about religion. I don’t think any government should interfere in what should be a civil issue between the two parties, their doctor, and their priest or minister. After all, don’t these same religious groups freak out over their fears of government persecution, or even worse (yes, worse) the idea that the government could eliminate their tax-exempt status? You betcha’.
What seems totally whacked to me is to expect any government, be it federal, state or local, to enforce abortion laws. They can’t, and the last thing in the world law enforcement wants is to get this incredibly divisive civic domestic dispute dumped on them. Expecting law enforcement to run in with their Gestapo boots on and shackle some pregnant teeny bopper to prevent her from having/aborting a fetus is just plain silly.
How About Some Equity?
The reality of pregnancy is that it takes one female and one male to do the deed. Right? So why should the government “legally” take over the bodily functions of the female who wants an abortion, while the guy who participated in the result gets to wander off into the lilies of the field and preach morality with no liability?
No sir, equity demands equal responsibility. So here are a couple suggestions that I have if the government is going to be in charge of abortion bans.
First, if a woman is denied her right to decide to have an abortion, then the guy and the government should be on the hook for her (and the baby’s) medical care until the fetus is 18 years old. And the man should pay child support for the same period of time, married or not, no exceptions.
In the case of rape or incest, how about the guy should be summarily sterilized, so that the idiot can be discouraged from doing it again, placing the burden on society? And even if he did commit this crime again, at least no one is going to get pregnant with a child who will be traumatized for life over the mess.
Second, while I’m on a roll, I don’t think a single one of these “right to life” organizations, groups, or churches would agree to be severally and individually liable for the care, education, or feeding of the mother. If they’re so hot about it, maybe they should pony up by providing medical and economic care for the mother who was going to have an abortion. Any takers? I thought not.
The Takeaway
If people want to join a religion that has the pro-life belief that life starts with a heartbeat, fine. That’s their absolute right. At the same time, they need to know that there are LOT of religions, and all of them have an equal right to their beliefs as well. You would be unsurprised that many do not agree with pro-life advocates.
The reason is simple. No one can force you or me to belong to any particular religion, and church members are free to leave and/or change their church of preference as they see fit. It is a voluntary, highly personal activity.
Making the government force everyone to hew to one set of religious beliefs, however, is NOT ok. It’s using the government and law enforcement to implement certain beliefs of certain religions, beliefs that are not everyone’s.
And the Constitution of the United States, with its all-important First Amendment, clearly states:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
To me, that’s it. A number of States have recently passed “pro-life heartbeat” laws, backed by certain religious groups and elected officials who no doubt are church members. They want the federal court system of the United States to sanctify their laws and criminalize behavior between a man and a woman so that a woman has her right to her own body superseded by the State. If that ain’t a violation of the separation of church and state, I don’t know what is.
Amazing, when you think that the United States of America was founded by a number of religious groups fleeing religious persecution in their own countries. How far we have come. And if you don’t think this is all about religion, you’re living under a rock.
Just sayin’…
(Tony Butka is an Eastside community activist, who has served on a neighborhood council, has a background in government and is a contributor to CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
