Can one be pro-life AND pro-choice?

A woman's right to choose is one of the most divisive political topics of the past quarter century. It has given rise to the modern religious right and groups like the National Right to Life and leftist groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL. It has caused the old "Southern Democrat" to be a thing of the past. It has sparked terrorist acts of bombing abortion clinics and the use of words like "murderer" or "slut" or "whore". It has caused Christians to condemn fellow Christians who choose to vote for a Democrat. It has fundamentally changed the way a President chooses a Supreme Court Justice. In short, Roe vs. Wade, for right or for wrong, has changed the topic of conversation of what Christians feel they should vote on, arguably, above any other issue in the country.

My hometown, Chattanooga, is in the middle of this struggle. Being in the Bible Belt, we're home to more Southern Baptists and little conservative churches than hairs on my head. We're notable for one more thing too though: Chattanooga is the largest city in America without an abortion clinic. Rossville, where I went to church, is home of a state representative who attempted, albeit an unconstitutional, to put a statewide ban on abortions in Georgia. When other Christians hear that I support Barack Obama for president, it never fails that I get a blank stare followed by rage about the issue of a woman's right to choose.

I've always been troubled by this point. I am pro-life. I believe God knew me before I was born and that if the law of our land wants to charge Scott Peterson with 2 counts of murder if he kills his pregnant wife then we should be consistent on intentionally ending a pregnancy. I also think that life is important after a baby is born though. As blunt as this sounds, its a heck of a lot easier for Sarah Palin's daughter, who has financially and socially stable mom AND dad, to make the decision to keep her child than it is for a girl from Detroit who has never seen her dad, has a mom who works two jobs and still can't afford health insurance, and can't even tell you the name of a college. Both made a mistake, but can we really judge these two girls equally? When Bristol Palin or Jamie Lynn Spears or whoever wants to finish up high school after having a child, they don't have a problem finding a babysitter. When the girl from Detroit is pregnant, she has to wonder how the food that isn't even enough to fill her own belly can be enough to fill another mouth (God forbid the baby be special needs or there are complications with the pregnancy, which adds even more costs). So what do I tell the girl from Detroit? Hang in there, if the Palins can do it so can you? Even if she were raped, do I hold her to the same bar of judgement that I do a girl from the 'burbs who decided that that abstinence only education class (another topic all in itself) wasn't worth it and didn't know about proper protection? This is where I found myself, pro-life but yet finding it difficult to tell a woman what she can do with her body with respect to the situations she finds herself in.

Here's where we get to the crux of the matter, to where we get to the motto of POLITIFIRE "common sense solutions." IN MY OPINION, the pro-life movement has focused itself entirely too heavily on overturning Roe vs. Wade and has lost sight of the real goal of minimizing the number of abortions in America, which pro-choice and anti-choice candidates can both agree on (that's why I refuse to label the right wing side pro-life and the left wing side pro-abortion). No one, even NARAL, thinks that abortion should be used as as a regular contraceptive for women. So let's look at the facts and see if we can discover 1) Why some women get abortions 2) How can we get them to choose another option

Here goes for NUMBER 1: Studies have shown that half of all pregnancies in America are unintended. Unintended pregnancies among poor women have INCREASED 29% and have DECREASED among upper class women 20% (a difference in abortion rate 4 times as much). So why do poor women get abortions? The most common answer given to clinicians a child would limit ability to meet current responsibilities and that they cannot afford a child at this point in their lives. This shows that poverty more than any other aspect gives us our answer to WHY.

Here goes for NUMBER 2: It is a tough answer, but let's look at why overturning Roe vs. Wade won't work for getting women to choose not to terminate their pregnancy. The lowest abortion rates of any place in the entire world might surprise you... it's in Europe... that's right liberal Europe where abortion is legal. The rate is less than 10 abortions for every 1000 women of reproductive age. Now that seems odd doesn't it? Europe has poor people too, right? Why would their poor women choose not to terminate their pregnancy? Answer: Poverty rates are much lower because of extensive social services provided to low income women. Even in America, states that have extensive WIC programs have a 37% LOWER abortion rate. Look at the other evidence of how poverty affects abortion rates: the HIGHEST abortion rates in the world are in Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean (29-31 abortions per 1000 women) even though abortion rights are most strict here. So how do we get women to choose life? We attack the root of the problem: POVERTY.

I think the Democratic Party has made a lot of strides when it comes to this topic. Rather than hiding from this issue because they're scared of losing pro-choice support, the Democratic Party, at the behest of Barack Obama, instituted in their party platform for the first time a goal of reducing the number of abortions in America by 95% over the next 10 years. The Republican party has no such tangible goal. Check out more of what Senator Obama wants to do here to reduce the number of abortions in America.

Look, before I get angry responses from some of my Christian brethren, and I mean this with love, please consider this with an open mind. I AM PRO-LIFE, I HATE ABORTION! I want abortions in America to be so few and so far between that clinics have to close up shop because no one is coming. The reality is though, that this can't be done by simply overturning Roe vs. Wade. That would simply turn the decision over to states, and we all know left-leaning states like New York and California, where most abortions occur because of city size, would never overturn the law. This issue hits right at the heart of what the_idealist and I want to do with this blog: give common sense solutions with forward thinking ideas rather than settle for how things have always been. America CAN AND MUST reduce the number of abortions in America, but bickering over a court case for a quarter of a century has made us take backward steps. WE OWE IT TO UNBORN CHILDREN TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM, AND THAT MEANS BOTH SIDES WORKING TOGETHER TO CURE WHAT WE CAN AGREE UPON: TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ABORTIONS BY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. Research this stuff for yourself guys, it's something I'm very passionate about as you can see. I'm frustrated at the arguing and at the lack of results. Let me know what you think. God bless and Go Dawgs

*Facts from this post were retrieved from www.prolifeproobama.com

Debate: Who Lost?

Who lost the debate last night? The American Public - that's who lost. 

        Where is the candidate who inspired so many people to register to vote? The one who encouraged more than just young people to register and be actively involved, but also middle aged Americans? Where is Barack Obama? At the same rate, where was the candidate who likes to buck his own party and tout bi-partisanship? Where was the one with solutions through his experience? Where is John McCain? Where are the two candidate that long ago promised a less contrived way of running for president? Are they both gone - lost to the envy of the presidency? 

        I heard amazing talking points last night, well up until about forty-five minutes into the debate that is. You see, I simply got up from my chair in the middle of about 200 people who had gathered on Lipscomb's campus to watch and went back to my dorm room. Once there, I put on my rain gear and went outside and played in the rain and stomped in puddles because I knew I would learn about as much outside as I would have watching the debate. When it comes to the economic crisis, the war, the war on poverty, healthcare and education the nearly 60 million people watching should have joined me because that debate offered no real solutions.  

        I know who I am voting for but I enjoy a good debate, therefor I watch them all. But last night was different; I couldn't bare to watch. With character assassinations and bringing up things from both men's past, I was DISGUSTED. What about those that are not decided? What did the people who are still looking for someone to lead them out of this economic meltdown, a war in Iraq and an ailing healthcare and education system learn from the debate last night? NOTHING, except for the fact that these two man can't stop throwing low blows to face the issues you and I face. Where is their dignity? Where is their pride in country? Where are the answers to OUR questions, not the questions each of them raise about the other? 

        It is far past the time when these men should stop attacking each other and start attacking the issues. If I hear the words: maverick, change, hope, Keating, tax-increase, angry-man, age, experience, celebrity, rock star, the one, that one - I think I will explode. I have never had such a feeling of disdain in an election. I love politics but at this point I am borderline apathetic because no one is answering the questions that face our great country in this truly troubling time. And for those of you that know me, if I am apathetic, I can't imagine what the rest of the country feels. 

        It is more than ENOUGH! I am so sick of hearing what their stump speeches are, what is written in the books they bring on the set, what the other person did in years past, what their records are; I want to know what they are planning to do NOW - NOW that our economy is falling apart, NOW that parents struggle to send kids to private schools because the public ones are failing all standards, NOW that we have killed 250,000 innocent civilians in Iraq, NOW that millions of people are left without the resources to pay for healthcare, NOW that the American dollar is worth its lowest since the depression. Not, THEN, I want NOW. Records are clear to us, we can check that; what isn't clear is what they want to do NOW. 

        If pressed, I would say that - while both did a horrible job in the debates, their commercials, mailers and web ads - Sen. Obama is the one with the most clear message. His is still muddled with attacks that Sen. McCain evokes from him. While neither men are clear in what they want to do, the one clear choice is Obama. I encourage you to do as I did and read Sen. Obama's site, his Blueprint for Change. There is where I found that his plans are what America needs in these tough times. He lays out exactly what he plans to do here, without the distractions from Senator McCain who knows his campaign is failed and is resorting to character attacks to garner votes.