Nothing gets me more fired up than liberals who want to interfere with the relationship between parent and child, and they are at it again. Alabama passed a law that requires either parental permission or court permission in absence of parental permission when a teen wants to have an abortion. This time the pro-abortion left didn’t jump to the obvious “THAT GIRL SHOULD HAVE UNFETTERED ACCESS TO ABORTION NO MATTER WHAT HER AGE” rallying cry. No the other problem they have with the Alabama law is that the Court appoints a guardian ad litem for the unborn child. HOW DARE THEY DO THAT??? So MSNBC leftist mouthpiece Melissa Harris-Perry stepped in and ramped up the rhetoric.
If you remember, Harris-Perry is the same genius that said that children belong to the community, not their families/parents. I addressed her fallacy here. Well, she continued the idea that the state, not parents, should have the final say over whether our daughters should have a surgical procedure that has a 100% guaranty of death. But she took it even a step further than that, comparing an unborn child to cancer. Really?
It’s not the first time I’ve heard the argument. I’ve heard unborn children called “leeches,” “tapeworms” and worse. But we all know that dehumanization is the first step to making murder acceptable.
Let’s also settle another annoying fact about teens. They aren’t adults. They may dabble in adult decisions, like having sex, but they are not, legally, emotionally or developmentally adults. They don’t have the maturity nor the brain development to be expected to make adult decisions. Legally a 13, 14, 15, 16 or 17 year old can’t enter into a contract, marry, or even consent to their own medical treatment. They should not be expected nor allowed to make life and death decisions.
Harris-Perry was arguing with Julian McPhillips. McPhillips is a civil rights attorney (and surprisingly a former Democratic Senate candidate) who is appointed by the Alabama courts to represent the rights of the unborn when teens go to court to get permission to kill said child. Harris-Perry was appalled, of course. She asked McPhillips:
Are you at all distressed in the ways that I am about the idea that there is a separate interest between an individual and something that is happening in her body that cannot at that moment exist outside of her body? So, the idea, for example, that I would need a court’s permission for cancer treatment or the court’s permission for surgery that would remove my hand. If it’s my body, I can’t understand why the state would have to give me permission.
Oh, Melissa, why are you so stupid? Beyond the fact that her sentences aren’t even coherent, the basic premise of what I think she’s trying to say is so flawed it’s ridiculous.
Let’s start with the very fact that she is an adult and legally allowed to make whatever decision about her health that she chooses. If she chooses to have cancer treatment, or cut off her hand, then she is entitled to make those decisions. If a 16 year old got in a car and drove to a doctor’s office for a checkup, the office would decline to treat him or her without his or her parent present. Why? Medical services are considered a legal contract. Minors can’t enter into contracts. Minors also can’t legally consent to medical treatments.
Abortion is a medical procedure. If a parent is required to ok a vaccination or treatment for the flu, then they should also be required to consent to an abortion.
Abortion is also a very dangerous procedure. Regardless of where it is performed, it ALWAYS results in death. The unborn child is always killed. Even under the best of circumstances, it sometimes results in two deaths, mother and child. A teen doesn’t have the maturity to understand the long term consequences of her decision in this matter. There are physical consequences: possible death, possible future fertility problems, and higher risk of breast cancer, to name three. There are heavy emotional consequences: depression, suicide, addiction and self-harm have all been proven to be emotional consequences of abortion. Those are far worse and a short sighted fifteen year old can’t appreciate the gravity of them.
Let’s look at the really ridiculous part of Harris-Perry’s comparison: that the unborn are like cancer. Cancer won’t grow into a contributing member of society. The unborn will. Cancer always kills or harms the person it is attacking, the unborn don’t and they aren’t attacking body systems in order to harm their mother. Cancer can’t ever live outside the human body. The unborn can, and eventually do. But that’s the mindset of the left: it’s all about ME and MY convenience. Don’t muddy the waters with pesky facts. And for God’s sake, don’t even think to give that separate being any kind of voice!
Let’s talk about that voice. Under the laws of most, if not all, states, the unborn actually have rights in our court system. It’s a legal schizophrenia that makes absolutely no sense, but in every other area of law besides abortion, the unborn have legal protections. They have legal standing in matters like inheritance. They are protected in times when the mother is abusing drugs. Their lives are counted when someone murders a pregnant woman, and the perpetrator is often charged with two murders, not one. If a woman is hurt (medical malpractice, car accidents, assault) and loses her child, she can sue for the value of that lost life. The courts have never equivocated about whether the unborn are 1) alive and 2) human. Only crazy pro-aborts make statements like Harris-Perry’s.
McPhillips put it very well when he said “The only problem with pro-choice is it’s absolutely no choice for the one life that’s really at stake.”