If you were actually pro life

By Alex Gryciuk 

TW: Abortion, Sexual Assult, Rape

A huge breach of confidentiality and shock to the world — Politico leaked  a draft opinion of the Supreme Court that articulated a strong notion to repeal the rulings established in Roe v. Wade. In 1973, Roe v. Wade challenged Texas’s criminalization of abortion when “Jane Roe”, a fake name to protect the identity of the defendant (Norma McCorvey), took federal action against the district attorney of Dallas country, Henry Wade. Justified by the protection of the 14th Amendment (right to privacy), the ruling of Roe v. Wade made it legal for a woman to have an abortion without excessive government restriction until 24 weeks of pregnancy in all 50 states. If repealed, it would be up to states to decide whether or not aborition would be legal. According to a political analysis of policy done by the Guttenmacher Institute, 22 states would defintitly remove the rights to abortion and four would likely limit or elminate the rights to a safe aboriton; resulting in more than half of American states banning abortion.

The notion to overturn Roe v. Wade is not only a moral dilemma, but a gross attack on women’s and human rights; despite what anti-safe abortion protesters insist upon. Often times arguments made against aborition revolve around moral, religious values: life begins at conception, women should not use abortion as contraception, abortion is murder, fetusus feel pain during the procedure, God created the baby and thus shouldn’t be aborted, etc. Using this ideological reasoning, Anti-abortionists call themselves Pro-lifers. Quite a smart name. Intuitively, you wouldn’t want to be against human life or protecting born babies. If you aren’t Pro-life, you must be Pro-death. However, Pro-choice couldn’t be farther from the Pro-death notion or even Pro-abortion stance that they are percieved as having. Personally, I don’t believe that abortion is nessasarly something that I fully support in most instances. However, I believe in the fundamental right to choose to have safe abortions if absolutly nessissary. What if someone gets raped? Sexually assulted? Becomes unable to care for the child when born? Abuses drugs? Have medical complications that could kill them if they gave birth? Rather than Pro-death or “Pro-murder” that many anti-abortion protesters insist upon, Pro-choice advocates for access to safe aboritions, while not necessarily advocating that women get aboritions. Roe v. Wade and Pro-choicers simply protect the right to choose, to free will, to living comfortably in the land of the free.

The fact still stands that aboritions still occur in states, nations, regions, etc where abortion is deemed illegal. According to a study conducted by the National Library of Medicine, an unbiased scientific research hub, “Less restrictive abortion laws do not appear to entail more abortions overall…where abortion laws are the most restrictive and contraceptive use is lower, the rates range from the mid-20s to 39 per 1000 women”. Abortions rather than reducing in amount increase where abortion is illegal; women differ to using illegal methods. Horrifying, “unsafe abortion include drinking toxic fluids such as turpentine, bleach, or drinkable concoctions mixed with livestock manure” in addition to “placing a foreign body such as a twig, coat hanger, or chicken bone into the uterus” or “methods of external injury…such as jumping from the top of