Chelsea Patterson Sobolik wrote this opinion article for USA Today earlier in 2019 titled, "I'm pro-life. That means protecting the unborn from abortion and also caring for women." I disagree with every idea she states in this article. She writes about how those engaging in the abortion debate have made this into a binary choice, either you care for women or you care for the unborn child, and she says that she cares about both. In my mind, these two statements are contradicting. Not allowing a woman to continue her life and forcing her to birth a child is not caring for that woman. Forcing a women to give birth to children they can't take care off will ruin their lives and also the lives of the children put into the US foster care system. So many children are never adopted and have foster parents who only take part for the money. Sobolik talks about how her birth mother put her up for adoption and she was adopted by a loving family, but what she doesn't realize is that a happy ending doesn't happen for all these kids. There are close to 443,000 children in the US foster care system today. Another ideal Sobolik writes is, "It's intellectually inconsistent to be personally opposed to abortion while still supporting a woman's right to have one." I disagree with this because just because a woman wouldn't personally get an abortion, doesn't mean she can't support another women's right to choose for herself. Sobolik believes that an unborn child is a human being and because of this, if we are for laws against killing humans we should be against laws that allow abortions to happen. This stance makes no sense to me, I do not see unborn fetuses as human beings because if they were born as a fetus they would not be a viable life. I am more concerned about protecting women and the thousands of children in the foster care system than a scientific group of cells inside a body. She also talks a lot about her faith in this opinion piece, because faith plays an important role in her life. She states, "faith shouldn't be a weapon, but an instrument of love." Even not being a religious person myself, I agree that faith should be used in a way of love. But, if using faith "as an instrument of love", is making a women who was raped give birth to a child she doesn't want, that is not love. Even if she gives the child up for adoption she will know the child exists and it will be a constant reminder of that awful experience and the awful person who raped her.
Article: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/05/22/alabama-abortion-ban-protect-both-women-and-unborn-column/3738904002/
Article: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/05/22/alabama-abortion-ban-protect-both-women-and-unborn-column/3738904002/
Try to break your work into paragraphs, it makes it so much easier to follow. I like your approach to writing; everything is well thought out and articulated. There are a couple spots where some varied word choice or different punctuation would strengthen your work, but you're doing very well. It seems like bringing up a woman's agency would help this piece. You write around it a lot, but never bring it up as a thing that women should have.
ReplyDelete