Mother’s health needs protecting, too

Are women valued by the Republican and evangelical religious anti-abortionists?

The religious right and many Republicans seem to believe that life of the fetus begins at conception and should be preserved without any or very few exceptions. On the other hand, the mother is a secondary consideration. The pain a woman is subject to is often seen as irrelevant.

There is also the biblical argument of thou shall not kill, but this seems to only involve pregnant women, not males and others involved in war, occupation that can legally use lethal force and our justice system. Clearly the use of lethal force is counter to the biblical commandment. It is also clear that simplistic directives are not realistic in the real world.

That leads to the obvious fact that pregnancy involves two lives directly, the fetus and the mother. These are the only two that will suffer direct physical health effects, possible long-term physical consequences, and possible death from a bad pregnancy. It then seems reasonable that we need to protect the mother’s health to the same degree as the fetus. That means that if the fetus is not able to achieve viability outside the mother, the mother cannot safely deliver the child or the mother will suffer grave long-term mental health issues, the mother’s health takes precedence over the fetus.

This is truly valuing women. Anything else to me is sheer hypocrisy and needs to be voted out.


Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today