This is a personal belief. The author assumes full responsibility for the content.

————

Most writers and speakers know the best way to lose an audience is to begin ranting. Regardless of the awareness I am willing to chance your loyalty. I warn you in advance, this is a rant.

“It’s a woman’s body; she has the right to do what she wants with it.” There are at least two inaccuracies with that mantra. First, there are many women who have been incarcerated for abusing their bodies, e.g., prostitutes and drug addicts. It is true the government has infringed on many freedoms using the premise that such infringement is for the governed’s best interest, e.g., required seat belts while driving a vehicle.

Truth be told, many of these “laws” were instituted at the behest of lobbyists who were supporting a business profiting from such an infringement. Let us remain with the example shown above, i.e., seat belts. Car manufacturers fought the required installation until they realized it was a level playing field and all manufacturers (world-wide) would need to install them. So, who did profit from the requirement? Insurance companies used it, in fact they supported it, as injury accidents were generally less costly and the requirement afforded a loop-hole for coverage, i.e., “Was the victim wearing a seat belt?”

Enough of our example! Let us return to the discussion as regards a woman’s right to decide for her body. The concept has its foundation in the right of a woman to choose an abortion. That too is an inaccuracy. If the practice of abortion were truly a matter of choice regarding her body a woman would seek assisted suicide to terminate the pregnancy, rather she seeks assisted suicide for someone else, i.e., a baby. Since a baby is unable to perform those actions required for assisted suicide, its life must be snuffed out by a third party. Under any other circumstance the law would label such action a homicide.

So, who profits from the legalization of abortion? The simplest answer is the woman. She is relieved of responsibilities and future expenses. Additional recipients exist. Those who perform abortions profit substantially. First they receive compensation for the procedure, secondly, they receive free advertisement as a gynecologic service, and as a bi-product, they are a source of human tissue. This simulates the raising of hogs: they use everything, but the oink.

There is a more subtle profiteering related to legalized abortion. Politicians who support the legislation receive stupendous donations as quid pro quo. In legal terms such action would be labeled complicity.

It is with great sorrow we witness the disrespect of life to fulfill lustful moments of pleasure. There is no respect for the gift of life when its origin is disrupted due to inconsiderate actions, and a lack of conscience. Such a lack of consideration constitutes a victory for evil through a careless application of lustful behavior. If a woman demands the right to choose her behavior, albeit a careless and lustful one, she should cherish the consequences of her actions. It is abhorrent to condone making someone who is innocent pay the penalty for her lack of consideration.

By Robert L. Scarry

From: United States

Twitter: usnavy1990bob

Facebook URL: https://wwwfacebook.com/Robert.Scarry.3