Yesterday, Connecticut’s Bristol Press published an op-ed by Alicia Watkins, a District resident-turned-Bristol columnist. The piece, titled “‘Take responsibility’ not effective answer,” detailed why Watkins was against abortion, but supported its legality. Fine. But while Watkins’ piece—-targeted at the pro-life set—-argued for keeping abortion legal and accessible, it also suggested that women who aren’t opposed to the practice are “wicked,” “evil,” and even “fictional.”
I’m against abortion. But then, I don’t know anyone who considers herself “for” abortion. To my knowledge, I’ve never met a woman who was happy about having one. I suspect these women are fictional, like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny—-only, you know, evil.
Yoo-hoo, Alicia. Over here. Me. I’m not against abortion. And the only reason that I wouldn’t say that I’m “for” abortion is because I don’t value any pregnant woman’s choice over another.
If a woman is pregnant, I think she should be able to choose to (a) have the kid and raise it, (b) have the kid and put it up for adoption, or (c) not have the kid. But I think those choices should be more than legal and easily accessible—-they should also be stripped of moral judgment.
Abortion is not wrong. And a woman’s personal, emotional reaction to her abortion isn’t wrong either. If a woman feels sad about her abortion, that’s fine. But if she doesn’t, that’s fine, too. The choice is difficult enough without having to feel bad or guilty for opting not to continue a pregnancy. Because for some women, abortion isn’t a moral compromise, a dark personal secret, or payment for past transgressions. It’s a relief. And branding those women as “evil” only increases the difficulty of making that choice.
So here’s a goal for the future of our pro-choice nation: When a woman decides to actually make that choice, try to refrain from assigning any sort of mythical baby-killing troll status to her.