Perspectives

The conservative case for abortion

Hint: It has nothing to do with feminism

By Alisa Farenzena
From the April 2008 Print Edition

Anyone who is familiar with my writing in this magazine knows that I am what has come to be known as a fiscal conservative. In my first article for the California Patriot, I spoke out against tax increases and defended Proposition 13. Judging from my writings here, especially my articles from the past several months, one might also guess that I am socially conservative. Indeed, I am quite socially conservative in the way I live my own life. However, as a matter of policy, I understand the reality that I cannot compel others to adhere to my moral code.

That is why I support abortion, an opinion that sets me apart from many other conservatives. At this point, some readers may be preparing to vilify me as some sort of liberal feminist, but that is not what I am. What I offer here is not a liberal argument, but a conservative case for abortion. It is a small-government argument and a family-values argument, a public-safety argument and an economic argument.

As a conservative, I do not want to live in a society with an all-powerful government. Think of how big a government is when it has the power to monitor what is going in doctors offices and clinics across the country. The government should not have the power to impose its will on something so far-removed from the halls of Congress as an individual doctors right to do what the Hippocratic Oath indicates is proper.

If a doctor decides that performing an abortion is a safe and appropriate decision, he should be allowed to perform the procedure. Likewise, if a doctor feels morally opposed to the procedure, the government should not be able to force him to perform it; the patient can find another doctor who will. If it is unsafe for a particular patient to get an abortion, doctors will refuse to perform the procedure on that patient through their own judgment and the Hippocratic Oath; they do not need an act of Congress.

Feminists often approach the topic of abortion as a womens rights issue. I dont see it that way at all, except for cases in which a woman is seeking an abortion because she has been raped. I see abortion as really being an issue of childrens rights: I believe that no child deserves to grow up in a situation without a stable family structure. What type of life is a child with an irresponsible, unwed mother going to have? Chances are, not one like the comfortable life I was lucky enough to be born into.

Children born into such circumstances grow up with the assumption that it is normal for their mother and father not to be married to each other. This cycle just repeats itself as these children become teenagers and conceive new children out of wedlock. Preventing the cycle from ever beginning in the first place is preferable to this sad outcome. That is why abortion is actually helpful in slowing the degradation of our society, as odd as that may sound.

Aside from the emotional damage associated with being born as a bastard child and living in an unstable household, many of these children also have physical damage from drug and alcohol abuse by their pregnant mothers. This damage exists whether the child remains with the unwed mother or is adopted by a well-meaning family. I know of a couple who adopted a little girl who was born with these types of problems. She is now around 40 years old and is an unwed mother of three children from different fathers. Nurture cannot overcome defects of nature.

Children born with unmarried parents are also prone to criminal activity. Growing up in a single-parent home roughly doubles a childs propensity to commit crime, according to Freakonomics, the 2005 best seller. Therefore, society as a whole is safer because abortion is legal. That is why I feel that abortion is the only medical procedure that the government has any business funding. It is a matter of public safety rather than socialized medicine, and it more than pays for itself through reduced criminal-justice costs.

Furthermore, if the woman who is seeking the abortion cannot even afford one simple medical procedure, how is she ever going to come up with the $250,000 or so that it takes to raise a child properly? The one-time government expenditure on the abortion prevents thousands and thousands of dollars of welfare handouts: food stamps, subsidized family housing, socialized health care, and the list goes on.

That is not to suggest that abortion should be used as a primary method of birth control. There are many legal methods available. However, if an individual is so strung out or otherwise mentally deficient that she fails to use these other methods, it is in everyones best interest that she is able to get an abortion.

It is my hope that fewer of these hopeless cases arise. If our society is ever to turn around, people need to reject the immoral behavior being pushed by Hollywood and condoned by others on the left. They will need to develop some self-determination on their own; policy is of no use here.

If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting the Patriot