How Roe vs. Wade enabled us to get pregnant

Today is the 33rd anniversary of the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision.

When Justice Robert Blackmun delivered the opinion of the court, he included the following statement, with which I wholly concur.

"We forthwith acknowledge our awareness of the sensitive and emotional nature of the abortion controversy, of the vigorous opposing views, even among physicians, and of the deep and seemingly absolute convictions that the subject inspires. One's philosophy, one's experiences, one's exposure to the raw edges of human existence, one's religious training, one's attitudes toward life and family and their values, and the moral standards one establishes and seeks to observe, are all likely to influence and to color one's thinking and conclusions about abortion. "

In other words, if you disagree with me, that's okay. I just think you're wrong. Thankfully, the same freedoms that allow women to make decisions about their own body also allow all of us to make decisions about what we believe without fear of repercussion. (At least that's how it's supposed to work.)

Just so y'all understand, I am very definitely "Pro-Choice". I am definitely NOT "Pro-Abortion".

S.A. and I tried to get pregnant for over 3 years. When we found out that we were finally pregnant, it was a huge surprise because we had basically given up hope of ever conceiving. We were operating under the assumption that we were going to have to adopt in order to have children. So needless so say, though we were both strong proponents of the adoption process before that point, we were definitely in favor of it now. But our personal beliefs for how we choose to live our lives are not something that we think has any legal standing.

Both S.A. and I come from big Catholic families, and I would be willing to guess that, were you to interview all the members of our immediate and extended families, you would get the same answers from about 95% of them.

Abortion is wrong. This is true (most of them would say) in much the same way that adultery, murder, and child abuse are wrong. I believe that, for this reason, many of them would tell you that they are "pro-life" and that Roe vs. Wade should be struck down. The only major problem with that line of thinking is this-

You CANNOT legislate morality.

Devout Catholics believe that it is WRONG to eat meat on a Friday. Muslims believe it's WRONG to eat pork. According to my old CCD classes (Catholic Sunday School, for all you non-Catholic out there,) the thought is the same as the deed so it is WRONG to "lust" after the hottie who sits 3 rows over from you in your biology class. And simply thinking about how nice it would be to pull out a rocket launcher and blow the SUV in front of you (who is driving 15 miles under the speed limit and has had his turn signal on for 7 miles) off the road is WRONG. It's the same as actually doing it in "God's Eyes".

But no-one would ever suggest that we make laws against all these things. Why? Because you CANNOT LEGISLATE MORALITY. This is THE basic concept upon which this country was founded.

Now I believe that you would be very hard-pressed to find someone who thought that abortion was something they hoped to go through at some point in their life. And to anyone who suggests that folks who have an abortion rather than the alternatives (keeping the baby, offering it up for abortion) , I offer up the following opinion.

You, sir/ma'am, are an idiot.

I'm not going to go into all the research that's been done about the lifelong mental and emotional effects of having an abortion (Do a google search. They're not hard to find. Also, S.A. wrote a much longer and, in all honesty, better blog about this stuff today.) but the decision to have, and the results of having, an abortion are not EASY in any way, shape, or form.

I'll probably try to post a bit more information here later today, but I'll offer up this last bit of personal information before I need to leave for church. (I know, shocking. The pro-choice heathen goes to church.)

When S.A. and I were basically given one last chance to conceive a baby, we were told that because of the nature of the medical treatment we were undergoing, the odds of having "high-level multiples" (e.g. 3 or more babies) were extremely high. Because of this, we were commanded by our doctor to come to a decision relating to our feelings about "selective reduction". In other words, because of the health risks involved in any multiple pregnancy and birth, would we be willing/able to choose to abort some of the fetuses if we found out there were 3 or 4 or 5 or more?

Obviously the specifics of our decision are a pretty personal thing so I won't give you all the details, but in short form, the answer was YES.

Because of the especially high risks to S.A. (We're considered a "high-risk" pregnancy.) carrying an especially high number of multiples (quints, sextuplets) would be EXTREMELY dangerous to both her and to the babies. Because of this, had selective reduction not been an option, (which it WILL NOT BE if our current political administration gets its way,) we would not have been able to have children of our own, because, as much as I want children, I was CATEGORICALLY unwilling to risk S.A.'s health and, more importantly, life.

Thankfully, when we finally got pregnant, it was with just one baby. He's due on April 16th. And I cannot begin to express how glad I am that I was not forced with making a choice between not even trying to conceive a baby and risking the life of the most important person in my life.

The opposite of "Pro-Life" is NOT "Pro-Choice". It's "Pro-Death". I'm immensely thankful that the laws in this country are such that people like S.A. and I actually had a choice. That, among many other reasons, is why I'm Pro-Choice.

Laterz