Two Friends Debate Abortion
(continued from last issue)

Dear Pat,

 Thank you for considering what I wrote to be as news-worthy as what you wrote!  But I hope you will publish a little correction. I did not approve of Bush's invasions.  I was only glad that women have benefited from the removal of the Taliban and Sadam Hussein. Both these governments imposed terrible grief on their respective peoples.  But the Pope begged Bush to find another way. And I agreed with the pope.  Remember?

 Pat, you have suffered for being a mother, and never more than in the past few weeks.  Loving our children leaves us open to pain, especially when we lose them to death.  Your instinct, which tells you not to believe in the death of your son, is true.  Death cannot possibly be the end for which we are born. 

 How can life lead to death?  How can a vital, loving person become merely ashes?  Logic screams against the very idea of death.  Once a life has started, that life is eternal.  Not just because people do not forget, but because creation gives the lie to anti-creation. 

 When it comes to abortion, I think my definition for the beginning of life is totally scientific. Life begins at conception.  Not when a baby takes the first breath (the legal definition).  Not when a baby is able to live outside the womb (as early as five months).  Not when a baby has discernible brain waves (at three months), or a heartbeat (at 3 weeks).  And not when it is merely an egg. 

 When an untruth is made Law, all kinds of consequences come from it.  The Supreme Court discovered a constitutional Right to Privacy in Roe Vs Wade in 1973.  This destroyed all laws concerning the protection of unborn children. And the welfare programs based on keeping children as the focus of aid began to crumble. 

 Where we once had AFDC, now we have TANF.  Children are not supported and women are paid for make-work.  When our new health care comes into force, we may well see here the forced abortions that China is infamous for  The Chinese use abortion as a means to improve their economy. This is just like the Nazis. They removed useless eaters before they began to remove the Jews. 

 Abortion has been used in the past as part of the war against the poor.  And why not?  Abortion providers make lots of money. And it is easy, unregulated work for any doctor.  The poor are targeted, as always. 

 Hoping that I have not said anything that hurts you! 

Yours, in troubled solidarity, Susan Dansand

Sue, 

I’m sorry for that error. I saw your “Re-Elect Bush” yard sign and assumed you supported his main work--invasions and war. We have murdered over a million people in Iraq and made over a million homeless. We have eliminated Iraq’s free housing and food programs for families. The women and children are worse off now under US continued colonization than under Hussein.

 In Afghanistan the women have repeatedly begged the US to stop the killing and start negotiating. The Taliban is still there and growing daily.  The US has assisted the warlords to take over in the Taliban’s place. The warlords are as violent as the Taliban. Now the women and children are living in a hell of US bombs, warlord rapes/ murders, and Taliban acid attacks and hunger.  And the US has revitalized the huge heroin (poppy) drug industry. The Afghan women and children are worse off now than before the US colonization.

 Roe Vs Wade was passed in 1973 as a result of massive freedom movements in the US.  The sixties’ civil rights movement won increased economic, social, and physical freedom for African Americans. The seventies’ feminist and welfare rights movements won increased economic, physical and social freedom for all women and for mothers and children in poverty.

 Freedom to control the number of children moms give birth to and raise was a victory for women’s freedom in 1973. It followed the 1965 Supreme Court decision that made artificial birth control legal in all 50 US states.

 Did welfare deform’s devaluation of children result from these rulings for women’s freedom? On the contrary.  By 1976 the welfare rights movement, led by African American moms, had won increased cash welfare support for children. They won the creation of foodstamps and SSI. They won Energy Assistance for heating help. These victories still benefit moms and children today.

 The road to Clinton’s 1996 welfare attacks on moms, children, the disabled and the workforce began with Ronald Reagan in 1981. The increased freedom and prosperity won for average US people during the 60-70’s movements came under direct assault.

 Reagan was a puppet for corporate america. And they were not happy with the living wages won by unions, uppity women, and African Americans. Nor were they happy with the safety net of AFDC and subsidized housing won by the activist moms. They united to crush the safety net and labor unions to force workers to accept bad jobs. By 1982 Reagan took away AFDC moms’ right to combine employment or marriage with AFDC. He wiped out half of section 8 and other subsidized housing. Combined with his attacks on unions, these changes led to huge increases in corporate profit and power. This was also the beginning of the massive loss of US jobs to poorer countries—globalization of big business.

 In the 90’s Newt Gingrich and Bush continued the Reagan attacks on workers and moms and children and disabled.  We lost more public housing for the poor as well as SSI for people disabled with drug/alcohol addictions.  We lost most General Assistance for single poor people. Finally we watched in shock as Clinton finalized the attack with his forced, unwaged TANF “welfare to work” program that replaced AFDC and spread across the world.

Now our country has become a shameful war-dependent nation of millions of citizens without jobs or even income. Half of US workers have no paid sick days or vacations pay or living wages. Minimum wage no longer pays enough for even cheap housing. Our streets are filled with hungry citizens without homes. The freedoms won on the streets of America have been gradually stripped away for the benefit of big business.

This deadly war on the poor is about uncontrolled greed by millionaires and billionaires, not about abortion. But the increasing restrictions on, and unavailability of, abortion is part of that war on poor women and children’s freedom. The terrorist anti-abortion movement’s murders and burning and bombing of women’s health clinics is part of that war on poor women and children.  The proposed health reform’s plans to deny abortion coverage is part of that war on the poor.

And no, I don’t think the abortion doctors are making lots of easy money while enduring threats to their lives. Nor is their medical work unregulated.

Peace, Pat Gowens