I know I’m a day late on this one but as always I’d like to say a few things. First of all, my condolences to the family of Dr. George Tiller. He was shot on Sunday morning—in the lobby of his church, while serving as an usher. Police have arrested the suspect and have yet to release his name. The motive seems to be pretty clear though; Tiller ran an abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas. His clinic has been the subject of attacks in the past; it was bombed in 1985 and Tiller himself was wounded in 1993 when a member of the anti-choice movement shot him in both arms. It is worth noting that Tiller’s clinic is one of only a few clinics in the nation that performed late-term abortions, or abortions after the 21st week of pregnancy.

This comes on the heels of the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, a supporter of women’s rights, to the Supreme Court. I can’t help but wonder if all the right-wing hate talk surrounding the Sotomayor nomination that has been flooding the airwaves last week was the final straw that pushed Tiller’s assailant to commit such a brazen act. In a church lobby no less.

Sadly, this isn’t an isolated incident. As I’ve said before, Tiller was attacked at least twice in the past, but he’s just one statistic:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm

http://msnbc.com/modules/clinics/

There’s a couple of pages of statistics detailing violence against abortion clinics and their employees. I think that it’s safe to say that these attacks originate from the fringes of the conservative, so-called “pro-life” movement—I don’t think that the majority of conservatives condone violence (at least not overtly) against abortion clinics or their employees, but comments like these (from twitter) sure make me wonder:

http://carnalnation.com/content/7628/3/tweets-hate-crazy-right-twitters-about-murder-dr-tiller

Ignorant cowards.

It doesn’t take much thought to see the irony here: a member of the so-called “pro-life” (read: anti-choice) movement murdering an abortionist. Make no mistake, this IS a case of religiously motivated violence… this IS religious extremism.

I want to make it clear that I’m completely opposed to late-term abortions except in rare instances where the life of the mother is at stake. Other than that, I’m pro-choice, but not because I *like* abortions or because I’m evil or immoral, or whatever else the anti-choice movement would say about me. Having a child is a huge commitment, and it’s a decision that should not be taken lightly. This is also a decision that males should just stay the fuck out of (for the most part). Our contribution to baby-making is fairly simple; we’re not the ones whose bodies go through massive, sometimes life-threatening changes in order to bring a child to term. Ironically, it’s usually the male in the relationship who can’t commit and pushes the female to get an abortion… and if she refuses? But I digress…

Legal abortions are a necessary alternative to illegal, often fatal, “back alley” abortions. I’ve brought up this point with anti-choicers, and their response is usually arrogant and condescending: “Well she shouldn’t have been having sex outside of marriage anyway” or something along that line. This seems to serve a dual purpose; it opens the door a little for some good old-fashioned proselytizing while reinforcing the idea that only “bad” people have abortions. I’ve long suspected that anti-choicers see pregnancy as both a blessing and a punishment—a blessing between married couples, and punishment for non-married couples. Many religious people whom I’ve spoken to on this subject, even view birth control methods (the pill, condoms, etc.) with the same contempt that many others reserve only for abortion. It just seems to me that the anti-choice movement is obsessed with controlling every aspect of everyone else’s sexual and reproductive decisions. And when they aren’t spewing forth religious rhetoric to justify their stance, they claim to be defending the unborn—a position that they clearly haven’t thought out too well because it begs the question, “Does every egg or sperm cell count as potential child?” I ask this question in response to the question “When does life begin?”

For any anti-choicers who have gotten this far into this post, brace yourselves because we might be in agreement on something: I believe that life begins either before conception or the moment of. I believe this, because as I write, millions and millions of cells in my body are going about their daily lives, carrying out critical, life supporting tasks, while being completely unaware that I exist… yet they are alive nonetheless. Expanding on this point, some might wonder how I could be pro-choice. I’d say that I’m pro-choice by default; I’m pro-choice because the alternatives are much worse. If a woman doesn’t want to carry a child to term then she shouldn’t have to (regardless of her reasons), and there should be a safe, legal way to handle this. Then at what point should we say that abortion is no longer an option? I think that once the fetus has measurable brainwave activity (around 25 weeks into the pregnancy) the mother should have made up her mind (in my opinion she’s had enough time by this point) and abortion should not be an option… hence, my opposition to late-term abortions. We could be here all day talking about options that do not include abortion, but they all miss the point: history has shown us that if a woman does not wish to carry a child to term, she will find a way to end the pregnancy; usually at great risk to herself. As for the religious justification for being anti-choice? Mind your own damn business. Not everyone believes as you do; the United States is a secular nation, not a nation that panders to any particular religious point of view (although sometimes I wonder)… get over it.