There is NO Place for a Woman’s Body in Canadian Politics Either

My stance as I stated in a recent post in regards to dealing with female “issues” in politics is to simply stop debating about it.  If we stop talking about it, it will disappear from the table that it currently finds itself on.  I was at the time referencing the US as it seems that every time there is an election a females right to choose becomes a national debate topic.  A negatively polarizing topic that sparks controversy and debate from all sides, and yet at the end of the day abortion will still occur.  The only change that will result is whether or not the female will be able to do it safely, or illegally with an increased chance of her own death in the process.  Unfortunately the past week in my amazing home country  of Canada, the debate has been sparked regarding when life begins. 
I do not want to debate where individuals are represented on our vast spectrum of opinions, that truly makes this country an amazing place to live.  The tolerances gained and learned from living in a country that embraces individuality versus the system of a melting pot is a freedom I love very very much.  But sadly I find myself not even able to google the subject that is currently being discussed in the house of commons without being bombarded with each group simply shouting louder than the next.  Bottom line is that we each individually have our opinions on when life begins, but what is more important is that these opinions are protected, and not to nationally change our opinions.  How many debates in regards to a woman’s right to choose have you listened to, and actually changed your mind one way or the other?  It rarely happens, because these debates are not designed to educate or bring new information to the table, instead it is a bureaucratic shouting match.
I will share one story I read in university in regards to when life begins, merely to show that there are staunch differences in opinions that knowledge of does not necessarily influence our way of life, simply broadens empathy.  There are groups of Eskimos that practice our definition of infanticide (as the fetus is outside of the womb) but in their society it is a late stage abortion.  If when the infant is born there are not enough resources to continue life past infancy the choice is available for the parents to determine whether or not they will allow the baby to survive.  As they live in a very harsh environment and the infant will usually take the breast for up to 4 years, this can be too much of a burden to accept every life that is formed.  Whether or not you agree with their way of thinking is reasonable or are absolutely outraged that any parent would willingly choose to terminate a fetus or infants life is absolutely your choice to make.  But consider the realities if the Eskimos were forced by law to keep every one of their infants and put all of their limited resources into keeping them alive.  The potential to  strip the very limited resources from the strong and healthy, would have a negative effect on the family unit, and it is safe to assume this group of people would have a decreased capability for survival. 
Consider also that the Canadian statics recently released estimate that each child now costs approximately $300,000 to raise.  That is a staggering amount of money, and I do not think that it would do our society a great deal of service to force every fetus conceived the same rights and freedoms as a income generating member of our society.  Individual’s right to choose what is best for them given their current circumstances is an integral part of our society.  I am pained to know that there is even any debate being given to such a sensitive and personal subject.  This is not a matter for national debate, rather it is one for the individuals and our rights and freedoms should be protected not forced.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *