thilly thenny

Much talk has been going on about Sarah Palin, the Republican VP nominee, the sex scandal, the baby and McCain throwing a dart while blind folded when choosing his running mate.

Well… I’m not really going to go into it.  There’s an inundation of analysis from both experts and amateurs.  At this point, I’m happy being an observer and finding out more about this curiously hot governor/mother/pro-life/pro-gun/anti-big oil nominee.

But I do want to use the scandal to discuss what I am curious about: sex education and pro-life/pro-choice discussions.

Sex Education

Obviously in Palin’s case, her teenage daughter had sex despite the abstinence only education program that her mother supports.  Under the assumption that most, if not all, teens will end up having sex if they wanted to, what’s the point in an abstinence only program?  I never understood that.  Yeah, teens are probably not as smart or invicible as they feel at the time.  I definitely remember being one not so long ago and not understanding that the rest of my life is nothing like high school, or even college.  But I wasn’t cognitively retarded.

Policy makers and parents assume that teens aren’t listening, but that’s just not true.  I think the more we empower teenagers (and actually all people) and give them the tools and information to make a choice that’s right for them, the less chance we’ll have of getting unexpected and unwanted pregnancies.  Teaching about birth control and STI prevention doesn’t automatically mean that teens are going to go out and pork everything they see.  If that were the case, then supporters of abstinence only shouldn’t be allowed to own guns.  If teens are going to pork like rabbits just because they have access to birth control, then apparently gun owners are going to go on a killing spree just because they own guns.  Sure… that makes a lot of sense.

Yeah, religion’s closely tied to the whole equation.  The difference is that religion is as much a personal choice as a social tool.  Teenagers who are truly religious and don’t believe in sex before marriage probably aren’t going to have sex.  On the other hand, teenagers of hyper-religious parents don’t automatically inherit their parents’ devotion.  This isn’t evolution according to Lamarck.

So why would there be support for abstinence only?  (Honestly.  It’s not a rhetorical question.  Someone explain it to me. Please.)

Pro-Life, Pro-Choice and the Moral Dilemma

So what if someone does get pregnant and it’s not planned?  Where the sex education piece seems like a no-brainer to me, I’m so utterly confused about the abortion debate. There just so many variables and circumstances to consider, and each seems to lead to a different decision process and answer.

First, I wanted to read up on why people have abortions.  Most of the articles that first popped up on Google were all very right-winged, religious approaches.  Although I’m not discrediting their opinions, it doesn’t give me an actual answer from the potential mothers who are considering that option.

Thankfully, I came across an account of a health worker, Lynne, who wrote about her experience.  (Although she’s very passionate about her pro-choice stance, the post gives a lot of insight on women’s decision-making skills and behaviours, which is extremely useful.)

The most common reason seems to be a lifestyle choice, and I don’t mean “babies aren’t convenient and they don’t match my white couch.”  Some women want to choose the lesser of two evils for them and the potential child.  Factors like relationship status, job stability, financial security, support system all play into whether or not a woman feels like she’s ready to become a good mother and capable of raising a child.  For other women, they simply don’t want a(nother) child.  But for the most part, women don’t feel great about this decision.  It takes a psychological toll, and against what pro-lifers think, women don’t have abortions willy-nilly just because the option’s available.

Other reasons for abortions (that I can think of) may include rape, certain medical conditions– the child is detected to have a gross abnormality that will cause pain/suffering; the woman didn’t know she was pregnant and fears the child might have fetal alcohol syndrom; fatal genetic syndrom; etc.,– medical conditions that affect others– women who take fertility drugs may have multiple fetuses and doctors sometimes advise aborting some to increase the survivability of the rest; or the pregnancy comes to a great risk of the woman’s health,– etc.

So many variables affect a woman’s (or a couple’s) ability to raise the child.  I don’t know if there’s a true ‘right answer’ to any abortion, much less abortion laws for all of the US.  That’s why I lean towards pro-choice.  But I also understand that the life of a potential child is not to be taken lightly, and allowing that choice may have detrimental societal effect.  There’s a certain fear that the public at large is not that bright and will become accustomed to the concept of abortions/or see it as a way to shed responsibility and hence, go through them without putting in the necessary decision making process.

… And I haven’t even started on thinking about the actual act of killing a living thing.  And what’s considered living?

No, no you can’t.

But what does one do?  What’s the ‘right choice’?  Thankfully, I haven’t had to make this decision because I think it would probably be the hardest decision in one’s life.