"About a baby’s right to choose" by Orlando Luis Pardo Lazo,
I.W.P. Visiting Fellow Writer, Department of Literary Arts, Brown University.
In her opinion column "A man’s right to choose", Dana Schwartz, as in all legalist approaches to baby abortion, misses an elementary point: life is by no means a biological burden to life, despite supreme courts —that may come and go with the ages—, gender gurus and political correctness more or less fashionableft.
“Every woman should have complete control over her own body and the decision to become a mother”. I couldn’t agree more with Schwartz. But this doesn’t extend to someone else’s body. Unless that the soon-to-be-born baby is deemed devoid of any control over his or her body and, in turn, deemed devoid of the decisions that he or she will never take once medically annihilated.
Modern society seems to have forgotten that babies are also women and men —mothers and fathers of other mothers and fathers to come—, not just sterile statistics for civil vindications. “Reducing the number of unwanted infants” is as simple as reducing the number of irresponsible conceptions.
Schwartz should be consequent enough as to discuss if women, in order not to be forced to become unwanted mothers, should “have the right” to destroy a baby’s body after “it” is born, but being still a part of her body through that last burden called the umbilical cord.
We condemn adult violence in Ferguson. We foster it from the very beginning against our own fetuses.