THE ABORTION DEBATE
The exchange in the April 5-11 issue between Italo Savella
and Ms. Towler, regarding abortion (The Mail, April 5) aired good arguments for
both sides. Here’s my take, for what it’s worth.
A friend once characterized human conception as akin to
boarding the 10 a.m. bus in Rochester,
bound for Chicago. At 10:30 you’re obviously not in Chicago
yet, but it’s equally obvious that, barring something unforeseen, you will be
in several hours. Similarly, barring something unforeseen, that embryo will
eventually be a baby, and it’s as pointless to object that it isn’t one yet as
that Buffalo or Cleveland or Gary
isn’t Chicago. I find that analogy
persuasive.
The rhetorical questions Ms. Towler raises, especially about
the role of men in abortion decisions, are also persuasive. There’s no getting
around the fact that it’s the woman who carries the embryo and bears the child,
that a teen with cruel or abusive parents has reason to fear revealing anything
to them. Still, no man, no baby: the prospective father has a stake in the
issue. And that justly frightened teen should have recourse to protective
services in the community. But neither of these observations implies a
solution.
Far too many abortions occur because, wanting no stake in
the issue, the father is either long gone or unwilling to participate in his
parenthood. Just as disturbing, abortion is too often nothing more than a
particularly violent and dehumanizing birth-control option. Worst and least
excusable of all, partial-birth abortion is only a few minutes away from
premeditated murder, no matter when you think life begins.
Ms. Towler’s remark that abortion is “a women’s health
issue” seems to see pregnancy as a disease and, I believe, insults women
right down the line. Most child-carrying women are perfectly healthy; when they
aren’t, when pregnancy seriously threatens a woman’s health, then most would
agree that an abortion may be justified.
My solution? I have none beyond this: absent a change in the
law, getting an abortion should be made complicated, at least somewhat
difficult. Significant obstacles should confront a woman seeking one, buffers
that would force her to stop and seriously consider what she is about to do.
Interviews should be required, forms completed, etc. At least then the young
(usually) lady would not be doing a repulsive thing impulsively, something she
may regret forever.
Peter Dzwonkoski, Westmoreland Drive, Rochester
Mary Anna Towlers’
response: As the mother of three children, I certainly don’t believe that
pregnancy is a disease. My comment about abortion being a women’s health issue
was related to the health risks — documented numerous times — associated
with back-room abortions.
THE WORLD’S COMPLEX,
NOT BLACK AND WHITE
I am not pro-abortion. I am pro-life, pro-choice, and attend
a catholic (not Roman Catholic) church. A Roman Catholic priest spoke about
abortion to hundreds of his church’s parishioners recently in ways that left me
fearing for the wellbeing of young people affected by his information. I want
to share my perspective — formed through personal experience, spiritual study
and practice, and scientific research by others.
Everything — an unfertilized egg, a plant, a piece of
paper — is life, in my opinion. Each moment, humans must
respect/use/end/start life. When I eat, kill a bug, recycle paper, or use birth
control, I try to choose carefully.
I had an abortion 22 years ago due to birth-control failure.
This decision, so hard to make, was preceded by soul-searching as well as
conversations with my partner (the father), deeply spiritual friends, and a
Buddhist teacher. My partner and I made our choice with sensitivity to each
other, the life we created, and broader impacts.
We weighed:
• My belief that life was within me even before conception.
• My partner’s belief that the final choice was mine; he
would respect and support it even though he preferred not to have a child.
• The distress I had seen in children and hard-working,
caring adults within one-parent families, when I shared houses with them.
• The impact giving a baby up for adoption would have on
many.
I had moved to Rochester
a year earlier, leaving behind dependable spiritual support, employment, and
friendship. To give birth meant leaving my new job, secured after a long
search. It would strain the organization I was helping to create, and the
relationship my partner and I were developing with an eye to marriage. We
believed abortion was the best choice in our circumstances.
I was grateful for the compassion and skill of medical
professionals involved at all stages of my abortion. Afterwards, I felt relief
and sadness; no enduring physical or emotional problems followed.
The priest’s presentation angered me, because it suggested
that women undergoing abortion often receive poor professional care, and
experience serious, long-lasting, physical and emotional aftereffects. While
I’m sure these problems occur at times, I didn’t experience them, nor did many
others I know. I was distressed that listeners didn’t receive an accurate
picture.
To deepen my knowledge, I read studies on both sides of the
issue and discovered varied findings (often related to reviewers’ beliefs).
Among them: women whose religion prohibits abortion are more likely to have
negative post-abortion responses, and Roman Catholic women experience more
guilt than others.
While I respect those whose choice differs from mine, I feel
deep gratitude that my partner and I — not a church, a priest, a lawyer, a
judge, a jury, or others with different beliefs than ours — were able to
choose.
Additionally, while Planned Parenthood had no role in my
abortion, I appreciate and support its work to provide sound information,
prevent unplanned pregnancy, and decrease the need for abortions so that fewer
people face this tough choice.
Finally, my thanks to Unitarian Universalists
and the United Church of Christ (co-creators of “Our Whole Lives” sex education
curriculum) and others who provide comprehensive information.Our world is painted in highly complex, multi-colored
shades, not in black and white. Knowledge helps promote responsible decisions
about sex and parenthood.
Jane Ellen Bleeg, Brighton
THE LONG HAUL
I heard a television journalist say that Donald Rumsfeld
takes a “long view of history” and therefore, his feeling that we might continue
in Iraq for
another 20 years should be easily understood.
Rummy can probably see an Iraq
20 years from now prospering under a quasi-democracy, inspiring young Saudis
and Iranians to overthrow their governments, pumping out cheap oil, making life
easier for Israel,
etc. I can only see some of the hurdles we would have to leap to get there —
like borrowing more billions from China,
convincing Americans to send fresh troops, crushing an insurgency that renews
itself at will, and so on and so on.
Smells like a really big job to me.
Meanwhile, back in the present, the New York Times reports
that Sunni bodies are showing up in Iraqi gutters with unusual wounds. Seems
that Shiite vigilantes have taken to boring holes in their neighbors’ faces
with electric drills before shooting them dead. Ah, those goshdarned playful
Shia and their power tools….
Oh, well, I guess every atrocity has a silver lining; every
failure invites new opportunity. Maybe soon we’ll see Home Depot stores opening
up in Baghdad.
Why not? According to Rummy, it would be best if we stayed
there another 20 years. That should be time enough for Walmart, McDonald’s, and
the others to get in on the act, too.
Vietnam,
anyone?
Gary Gray, Highland Drive, Penfield
WRITING TO CITY
We welcome and encourage readers’ letters for publication.
Send them to: themail@rochester-citynews.com or The Mail, City Newspaper, 250
North Goodman Street, Rochester14607.
Our guidelines: We don’t publish anonymous letters — and
we ask that you include your street name and city/town/village. We don’t
publish letters that have been sent to other media — and we don’t publish form letters generated by activist groups. While
we don’t restrict length, letters of under 350 words
have a greater chance of being published. We do edit letters for clarity and
brevity. And in general we don’t publish letters (or longer “op-ed” pieces)
from the same writer more often than about once every two months.
This article appears in Apr 19-25, 2006.
