|
The Frivolous Dawn
by Chilo Metropolis
In an effort to make this epitome amicable enough for both sides of the campaign between the "pro life/pro choice" philosophy, you must first understand a few things about myself, the person who articulated this synopsis.
If anything at all, I am a moderate centrist. I do not support Bush and his regime, nor am I a hollering conservative who is hopeless to the state of an open mind. The reason I felt like declaring these charecteristics of my philosophie(s), is to keep the reader aware that I am in full support of freedom and mirth, and my belief and stand point on pro life, has nothing to do with degrading the female gender, or suppressing the freedom of choice. In so many words, I believe everyone on this planet should be entitled to their freedom of choice, but under the presumptive circumstance that their freedom of choice is not capable of bounding the freedoms of another.
This argument is one in which both sides can present audacious principles. However, I do not believe in jeering women to imply their values are disposal, but people in general need to start taking responsibility. The jubilant demeanor of encouraging equal rights and shameless freedom is great, but there comes a point in which a line must be drawn and some things can only be described as, "It is, what it is." I have heard all of the deplorable statements toward the idea of pardoning the right to abortion and still stand firm by my guard.
If there is one thing, one activity in the world that you have a customary amount of time to really think about the event you are about to engage in, it's definately having sex. Now before you start thinking in tangents about the big picture, you must also take a look at several of the smaller ones first.
- This idea pardons women who were raped recreationally or incestually.
- It also pardons women who are declared financially unstable, in which they would have the right to freely present their request to a jury or judicial administrator.
- A fetus, regardless, is more developed than a sperm cell or an egg, making it the "first step" of human life. If the egg has been fertilized, the cycle of life has begun. Looking at it as some bagatelle of flesh is pretty grisly, don't you think?
And lastly, take into consideration , I do not intend to gesture that a male should not be held to a reciprocal duty along with the female who sustained pregnancy and gave birth after mutual intercourse.
But realistically (until laws are either depleted or revised of course), it's a never ending battle between two energies with the same force behind them.
The removal and inevitable death of an intelligent creature that intrudes the proability of new life seems nothing short of fundamentally immoral.
|
|