Abortion is a polarizing, hair-tearing, screamer of an issue.
Let's start with facts before devolving to emotions and alienation.
There are undoubtedly pros and cons about abortion.
Abortion or the need for an abortion is not a happy moment.
People (and yes, women are people) don't flippantly or casually opt for abortions.
If abortions were a solution for unplanned or inconvenient pregnancies, this
author might not have his three beautiful, wonderful children.
That said, there
are unplanned or inconvenient pregnancies.
They are called rape, incest, age,
medical conditions and sometimes even financial considerations.
It is not difficult to rationalize what one might do in circumstances such
as these.
It is a personal decision and one over which there is much thought and
often agonizing.
But it is not the decision of the state.
It is not the decision
of someone else's God.
It is not "Door #1, Door #2 or Door #3?".
It
is that individual's decision after examining the options and the pros and cons.
Scientifically, in the first trimester, there is a mass of cells beginning
to differentiate. It is not a viable organism outside the womb.
By the third trimester,
given the abilities of modern medicine, very often it is a viable organism.
This
is why there are different rules about different trimesters and in some instances
they are sensible depending upon one's perspective.
There are some who would insist life begins at conception.
Sperm and eggs
are alive prior to joining.
There are some who would insist that it is murder
to kill a life.
It's not Fred or Julie yet. It's an egg and sperm who decided
to cohabit and double their numbers of genes and cut their utility bill.
Each
time a woman ovulates without conceiving, she kills half a human by this logic.
By
this same logic, every wet dream kills 100,000,000 halves of human beings.
In
Texas, a law has been proposed fining those who waste sperm.
Using the word murder
is a substitute for calling it a sin. Murder is a sin.
Abortion may or may not
be a sin depending upon one's religion.
And here it get's sticky.
The Constitution guarantees separation of church and state.
If one's religious
beliefs dictate something and they enact a law compelling another to accept those
religious beliefs,
that violates the separation of church and state and infringes
upon that person's civil and Constitutional rights.
This extends to abortion.
Society
draws lines at whether geriatric males can insist on marrying a dozen underage virgins
as a valid expression of their religion.
Therein lies a bit of a contradiction.
Underage
virgins will be hurt by this action and they have rights regardless of one's beliefs
(except for geriatric male's beliefs).
Do day-old fertilized eggs have rights
(or by extension a soul)?
Enough of a consensus exists that there is no consensus,
therefore it is not defined as a soul or not a soul.
Thus for each his own as
per the Constitution.
Another compelling argument is "What gives the state the right to tell
a woman what to do with herself, her body, her future?"
This author can think
of lots of compelling instructions for woman and her corporeal self.
No mixing
of plaids and stripes.
No tattoos with sentences that end in prepositions.
Maybe
some prohibitions on drinking and driving.
A few others, but beyond that it is
not the business of the state.