O Father
I asked a question the other day, apropos of abortion, "Who said having a baby was better'n not having a baby, anyway?"
Even I thought it sound pretty sacreligious. Then I remembered God's words, "Go forth and multiply". That's why it sounded sacreligious - because it IS sacreligious.
In any case, the question came about because I was contemplating actual motherhood versus the version of motherhood presented in abortion debates by anti-choice consumers, er, I mean, citizens - and I realized that for all its seeming glory and importance to the well-being of all, it's pretty shittily paid. I mean, for a society that measures a fellow's worth in monetary terms....
Aha! "A fellow's worth" - that's it! Mothers are women! Always and forever! THAT'S why the pay is so shitty!
And the reason I'm mentioning pay in the context of motherhood is because even people (men, in this particularly section of the debate, I've noticed) who aren't necessarily anti-choice, believe abortion, legal though it may be, should not necessarily be covered under our public healthcare system. Or, if it is, it should have conditions attached. Because abortion isn't cancer or even a sports-related injury. It's different. It's a choice. Women CHOOSE to have abortions.
(I could say that maybe birth shouldn't be covered under our public healthcare system either, then. Since women CHOOSE to have babies. In fact, maybe babies shouldn't be covered. Or kids. Or adults. Since people who choose NOT to bring new life into the world are being penalized by those who do.)
(And don't think privatizing healthcare would change THAT argument. After all, insurance rates would still be predicated on what it costs to PROLONG life. Clearly, the childless get hosed no matter the system.)
On the other gender hand, women who are anti-choice, I've noticed, are anti-choice for religious reasons. They believe abortion is a sin. Sometimes, they believe that the life of the unborn zygot, fetus, baby is more sacred than the life of the mother. That it is without sin and therefore more promising a life. Innocent. Everything.
Now, I've known practicing Catholic mothers whose daughters have had abortions. They are invariably practical people, Catholics. And I say "Catholic" because I happen to know lots of Catholics and they are the group I associate most with the abortion issue because their Church is so demonstrably ruled by men. It is a top down hierarchy with the entire top level being all male and there being no other level. Really. Nuns being a separate pink ghetto altogether - completely missing out on the money angle of Church life. (And I realize all religions are Patriarchal, I'm just using Catholicism because it's the one I know best, although I'm from a United Church family, myself.)
These girls had abortions IN SPITE of the fact that the stigma of teenaged pregnancy is largely a thing of the past. Gone are the days when the daughter had to be hidden away, when the ensuing baby was just shameful evidence of a genetically flawed morality. I know baby boomer parents of indeterminate religion - they may be Catholic, I don't know - who are raising grandchildren - quite happily. I know - I actually know - a father - a father - who is secretly harbouring the hope that one of his daughters will get pregnant - out of wedlock - and that she'll give the baby to her mother and him to raise. They want grandchildren, you see. Just not a son-in-law. Or even, really, their daughters hanging around the house, anymore. They want a fresh, new baby with whom to get it right. As he jokes, "The girls are okay. But I could do better if I had another shot at it. I was too young the first time 'round. And now the old ball and chain is too old to have one of our own."
Adoption is out of the question. They've lived lives too wild to pass any kind of an adoption agency test. Oh sure, they could lie. I mean, anybody who has successfully adopted a baby that I know has lied. Lied through their teeth. It's the only way to get a baby through adoption. My God, we'd have babies piled up for adoption from the 1930s if people didn't lie. And our society makes liars out of adoptive parents because we pretend that Motherhood is the most valuable of valuables.
So valuable we simply cannot put a price on it. You'd just better be one freakin' holy consumer, er, citizen if you want to adopt a fresh clean baby in this society.
Or a damn good liar. (Which you're going to need to be anyway, since parenthood seems to me to be an ever-increasing lie pile. Unless that's just me...)
So, back to the funding angle. While anti-choice women don't seem to argue much about the funding angle - their starting and finishing point is that abortion is wrong because God says it's wrong - men, anti-choice and "pro-choice-with-conditions", will often argue the funding point like some men will argue the finer points of bass guitar vs guitar. As in, abortion shouldn't be funded under a universal healthcare system. That it's not just a medical procedure. It's... more. al...
It's MORAL! Aha! It's a moral issue. Not a medical procedure. Well, it's that, too, they'll concede. But with conditions attached. Moral conditions. As defined by health boards, committees, tribunals. Inquisitions even, maybe.
Hm. Well, well. Let's see here. It's legal. We have a universal publicly funded healthcare system. Policians are overwhelmingly male. Hospital administrative boards are overwhelmingly male. Abortion is...
Oh, it's a FEMALE medical procedure. A female medical procedure that translates into "No Baby". Now... why would Man X care if Woman Y has Man Z's baby or not? We know for a fact that Western anti-choice people aren't throwing themselves down in Tiannemen Square to protest China's mandatory abortion laws. We know there are plenty of crack babies born in North America who aren't being adopted by people desperately wanting a baby of their own to nurture and raise. We KNOW that there is an incredible and historically unprecedently human population competing for limited Earth resources.
What gives? Well, even the most cursory reading of almost all of our rightwing male pundits will reveal a touch of tribalism at play in the argument that abortion is an abomination to humanity. Yes. Of course. Especially.... white humanity. These are the same pundits who believe motherhood is the most valuable of valuables. So valuable that... yaddayadda blahblah... quit being so mercenary Mom - a baby is its own reward.
Because isn't it all just so much mumbo jumbo? God said, "Go forth and multiply". He didn't say, "Have an abortion if you don't want a baby. All those birth control pills you ladies are taking are destroying marine life and turning boys into girls. And hey guys - vasectomies really aren't all that reversible - and they hurt like a bitch - if you weren't such putzes you'd demand at least a couple of days stay over in the doctor's office. Hey kids, latex condoms can lead to latex allergies - a nasty lifelong affliction which will expose your hands to the caustic aging elements of dishwashing detergent - oh, and STD's when you take them off because if you're like every other kid, you're probably pretty stupid and 'in the moment, man' and think you can't make a baby your 100th time, anyway."
Or did He? Because in the absence of Patriarchy (which I am slowly but surely eliminating all vestiges of from my life - and you'd be surprised how much Patriarchal debris haunts the life of a Fatherless girl) - I find it hard to believe that God DID NOT say the above. I mean, how much do we REALLY know about the guys - GUYS - who took down His - HIS - every word?
That's right. Not much. All I know for sure is that a lot of people feel they should have the right to tell me whether or not I should have to carry a pregnancy to term, and that even those people who feel they shouldn't REALLY have the right - TOTALLY, like without the backup of a Committee or somesuch Group of Superiour Beings - to tell me whether or not I should have to carry a pregnancy to term, DO believe that they shouldn't have to pay for my choice - IF, and this is important - IF I choose to NOT bring the pregnancy to term.
Otherwise, they're probably okay with it. Even though babies cost WAY more than abortions.
Hm...
