Different conceptions
Pro-Choice
Issue date: 9/17/08 Section: OpEd Page
Pro-Choice
Imagine a country where all reproductive rights are up to the government. If you become pregnant, your only choice is to have the child-regardless if the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest. Possibly the most shocking aspect of a government supported pro-life agenda is the fact that even the ability to buy a package of condoms will be gone. You will go through school only being taught that sex is bad.
Most people equate the term "pro-choice" with abortion, but the right to abortion is only one element of the pro-choice movement. College women and men, in particular those who may be adverse to the idea of being "pro-choice," must start rethinking what the movement means. Even in the 1960s, states like Connecticut were still prohibiting the right to use contraceptives. Just barely 50 years ago, even if you were married, contraceptive rights were nearly nonexistent. It wasn't until 1965, with Griswold v. Connecticut, that the right to privacy was given to married couples. In 1972, Eisenstadt v. Baird extended the right to unmarried couples.
Roe v. Wade in 1973 famously ruled that abortion is legal and the choice of the woman. This landmark case has influenced numerous rulings, especially Lawrence v. Texas (2003).
It is important, especially when discussing the subject of pro-choice to keep these cases in mind. Fifty years may seem like a long time ago, but this election could prove to be another crucial point in the timeline of pro-choice history.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska) have both elucidated their plans for women across the country, and McCain's voting record shows that he is clearly against any sort of choice for women. In just four years (1983-1986), McCain voted against pro-choice legislation 10 times out of 11. Additionally, both McCain and Palin vow to replace thorough sex-education and replace it with abstinence-only education. Under this potential administration, Planned Parenthoods will be closed eliminating accessible birth control, including everyone's favorite: free condoms. The once affordable birth control that can currently be found for college students at Planned Parenthood will inevitably sky rocket with these closings as well. And these are just the short-term consequences. In the long run, McCain and Palin vow to nominate Supreme Court justices who will work to overturn Roe v. Wade and Griswold v. Connecticut, eliminating privacy rights for women. And with so many justices soon up for retirement, this is a strong possibility. Additionally, he has the potential to nominate hundreds of federal judges as well as heads of several regulatory health agencies. Clearly, McCain and Palin do not have women's best interests at heart. In the long run, this means women's rights to choose what to do with their body will be repealed, but even more importantly, their right and access to contraceptives will be denied.
Imagine a country where all reproductive rights are up to the government. If you become pregnant, your only choice is to have the child-regardless if the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest. Possibly the most shocking aspect of a government supported pro-life agenda is the fact that even the ability to buy a package of condoms will be gone. You will go through school only being taught that sex is bad.
Most people equate the term "pro-choice" with abortion, but the right to abortion is only one element of the pro-choice movement. College women and men, in particular those who may be adverse to the idea of being "pro-choice," must start rethinking what the movement means. Even in the 1960s, states like Connecticut were still prohibiting the right to use contraceptives. Just barely 50 years ago, even if you were married, contraceptive rights were nearly nonexistent. It wasn't until 1965, with Griswold v. Connecticut, that the right to privacy was given to married couples. In 1972, Eisenstadt v. Baird extended the right to unmarried couples.
Roe v. Wade in 1973 famously ruled that abortion is legal and the choice of the woman. This landmark case has influenced numerous rulings, especially Lawrence v. Texas (2003).
It is important, especially when discussing the subject of pro-choice to keep these cases in mind. Fifty years may seem like a long time ago, but this election could prove to be another crucial point in the timeline of pro-choice history.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska) have both elucidated their plans for women across the country, and McCain's voting record shows that he is clearly against any sort of choice for women. In just four years (1983-1986), McCain voted against pro-choice legislation 10 times out of 11. Additionally, both McCain and Palin vow to replace thorough sex-education and replace it with abstinence-only education. Under this potential administration, Planned Parenthoods will be closed eliminating accessible birth control, including everyone's favorite: free condoms. The once affordable birth control that can currently be found for college students at Planned Parenthood will inevitably sky rocket with these closings as well. And these are just the short-term consequences. In the long run, McCain and Palin vow to nominate Supreme Court justices who will work to overturn Roe v. Wade and Griswold v. Connecticut, eliminating privacy rights for women. And with so many justices soon up for retirement, this is a strong possibility. Additionally, he has the potential to nominate hundreds of federal judges as well as heads of several regulatory health agencies. Clearly, McCain and Palin do not have women's best interests at heart. In the long run, this means women's rights to choose what to do with their body will be repealed, but even more importantly, their right and access to contraceptives will be denied.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Tara Atkins
posted 9/23/08 @ 4:20 PM EST
Great article! I completely agree. I hope more women realize what damage would be done if McCain/Palin are in office. Please vote Obama!!
jasonglades
Writing an essay
posted 2/16/09 @ 9:53 AM EST
That's right! Women must have rights to choose what to do with her body.
Post a Comment