Recent events surrounding Trumps' statement on abortion erupted a series of debates across social media this week in regards to women's rights.
Abortion is one the most sensitive topics that politicians tend to move around, more often than not, instead of actually taking a stand. It is a known fact that most liberals tend to follow the Pro-Choice movement, as opposed to most conservatives who support the Pro-Life movement (of course with some exceptions). As a conservative, Trump echoed what he and a lot of other conservatives feel about abortion. In an interview that aired on MSNBC (footage below), Trump stated that he believed that "there should be some sort of punishment" for women who have abortions and/or the doctors who preform the procedures.
Abortion is one the most sensitive topics that politicians tend to move around, more often than not, instead of actually taking a stand. It is a known fact that most liberals tend to follow the Pro-Choice movement, as opposed to most conservatives who support the Pro-Life movement (of course with some exceptions). As a conservative, Trump echoed what he and a lot of other conservatives feel about abortion. In an interview that aired on MSNBC (footage below), Trump stated that he believed that "there should be some sort of punishment" for women who have abortions and/or the doctors who preform the procedures.
Shortly after, the interview went viral and a GIF of a popular FRIENDS quote circulated the internet.
The episode that originated this quote was not intended towards discussing abortion, however, today it used to sum up the Pro-Choice stance on the issue in four simple words "No Uterus, No Opinion". Of course this is an exaggeration, many supporters don't actually feel that way. Nevertheless, it is a bold statement meant to state a point. It does raise an important question though: Who has the right to decide women's rights? Is it only women? Congress? Trump?
For the sake of woman kind, hopefully Trump is not the deciding vote on the subject.
Changes in Trump's stance on abortion overtime are alarming and questionable. In an article titled Donald Trump abortion muddle, Trumps' gradual shifts are chronicled and show him going from Pro-Choice in 1999, to being Pro-Life with caveats in 2015, to flat out wanting to ban abortion and punish the women who have them, by 2016.
There are a plethora of reasons why banning abortions completely and making them illegal is illogical. If religious reasons are taken completely out of the issue, and the idea behind reasons for abortion are considered logically, there are valid arguments for why abortions must be accessible for women who make the choice to have the procedure. The main argument is that unwanted children, as mentioned in this article Nine Reasons Why Abortion Should Remain Legal, end up being liabilities that the government uses tax dollars to keep alive or out of trouble.
Among that are other reasons that include the risk of pregnancy for underprivileged women. If the reason for banning abortions is to protect women's health, then doesn't that directly contradict that very purpose?
Considering the risks unwanted pregnancies and the potential disaster the lives of the mothers and children involved could become, the abortion dilemma should be dealt with gracefully instead of shouting out outrageous comments about punishment. A person's own beliefs should not dictate the law for everybody else. Whether it's Trump or Sanders, the decision should come down to a compromised agreement between both sides of the argument.
Fortunately though, as of this moment, it is not up to Trump to decide what happens to pregnant women.
The statement "No uterus, no opinion" is not definitive to how Pro-Choice people feel about the subject. At the end of the day, both a man and a woman are involved in an unwanted pregnancy, therefore not having a uterus does not disqualify a person from being involved in the conversation about abortion. But then, what is the deciding factor that determines who has the right to talk about, or make decisions concerning abortions?
The answer is not simple, but it does start with a simple concept. No one knows what it is like to carry on with an unwanted pregnancy, other than women who have been denied the right to do so. So before making judgements about the topic, people must remember that their opinion is only secondary to those of women who have had, or ever wanted to have, abortions.
Everyone can all be involved in the discussion surrounding reproductive rights as long as we keep those women in mind.
To know definitively who has the right to decide the future of women's reproductive health care is difficult. However, if people agree to approach the subject with an open mind and an unbiased, logical approach, we can get to a compromise that pleases both Pro-Choice and Pro-Life supporters.
For the sake of woman kind, hopefully Trump is not the deciding vote on the subject.
Changes in Trump's stance on abortion overtime are alarming and questionable. In an article titled Donald Trump abortion muddle, Trumps' gradual shifts are chronicled and show him going from Pro-Choice in 1999, to being Pro-Life with caveats in 2015, to flat out wanting to ban abortion and punish the women who have them, by 2016.
There are a plethora of reasons why banning abortions completely and making them illegal is illogical. If religious reasons are taken completely out of the issue, and the idea behind reasons for abortion are considered logically, there are valid arguments for why abortions must be accessible for women who make the choice to have the procedure. The main argument is that unwanted children, as mentioned in this article Nine Reasons Why Abortion Should Remain Legal, end up being liabilities that the government uses tax dollars to keep alive or out of trouble.
Among that are other reasons that include the risk of pregnancy for underprivileged women. If the reason for banning abortions is to protect women's health, then doesn't that directly contradict that very purpose?
Considering the risks unwanted pregnancies and the potential disaster the lives of the mothers and children involved could become, the abortion dilemma should be dealt with gracefully instead of shouting out outrageous comments about punishment. A person's own beliefs should not dictate the law for everybody else. Whether it's Trump or Sanders, the decision should come down to a compromised agreement between both sides of the argument.
Fortunately though, as of this moment, it is not up to Trump to decide what happens to pregnant women.
The statement "No uterus, no opinion" is not definitive to how Pro-Choice people feel about the subject. At the end of the day, both a man and a woman are involved in an unwanted pregnancy, therefore not having a uterus does not disqualify a person from being involved in the conversation about abortion. But then, what is the deciding factor that determines who has the right to talk about, or make decisions concerning abortions?
The answer is not simple, but it does start with a simple concept. No one knows what it is like to carry on with an unwanted pregnancy, other than women who have been denied the right to do so. So before making judgements about the topic, people must remember that their opinion is only secondary to those of women who have had, or ever wanted to have, abortions.
Everyone can all be involved in the discussion surrounding reproductive rights as long as we keep those women in mind.
To know definitively who has the right to decide the future of women's reproductive health care is difficult. However, if people agree to approach the subject with an open mind and an unbiased, logical approach, we can get to a compromise that pleases both Pro-Choice and Pro-Life supporters.
This is a truly excellent post, Mariam! The points you make here are very compelling, especially in regards to the fact that unless you happen to be one at some point in your life, it's impossible to truly step into the shoes of a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy. While for the most part I tend to lean heavily towards liberalism in my choices and opinions, I've always been raised to try and examine both sides of the coin, and I think you've done a very good job here of doing that and keeping your stance on the matter neutral.
ReplyDeleteWhile I've never been faced with an unwanted pregnancy myself (and therefore can't truly understand what it's like to be in that position), there are immediate members of my family who have, and I've gotten a close look at what can come of either option. There are pros and cons to every single choice we make in our lives, but ultimately I believe that women facing unwanted pregnancies should be able to at least HAVE a choice. Just like how treating sex as some dirty, sinful thing won't do a damn thing to keep some people from having it, making abortions punishable by law won't do a damn thing to stop some people from seeking them out. The majority of humans are hardwired to be extremely sexual creatures by nature - it's part of how we've managed to survive for this long as a species. Unprotected sex, unplanned pregnancies, and the aborting of said pregnancies are all liable to happen, no matter what. So shouldn't women at least be able to have the option of having these procedures done in a safe, sterile, non-traumatizing environment? This is an extremely important topic that I think far too many people - especially politicians - skate around because it makes them uncomfortable, and I thank you for taking the time to write about it in such an admirably reasonable manner.
This post really introduced me to the huge problems dealing with abortion. I feel like the only thing that's fueling the debate between Pro-Life and Pro- Choice is religion and tradition. Trump is pretty much appealing to the Southern Christian republicans whenever he starts throwing out these stupid comments. It should be a woman's choice to do whatever they want with their body. It's like some males are afraid of losing that power they hold over women. I hope the topic of abortion starts to favor women who want to take care of their own bodies, and not the men.
ReplyDeleteThe true testament to the success of this post is the dialogue that you have created here that continues the conversation thoughtfully and deeply. Nicely done! What I particularly like about this post is the rational approach to a very emotional issue. And you argue this precisely--the looping back to the Friends quote moves it beyond meme--it makes it a mantra that summarizes how many women in America and abroad feel about bodily autonomy.
ReplyDelete