Use prevention

I told myself long ago that I would not fall victim to the pro-choice/pro-life debate. I, like everyone else in this country, have a fundamental right to my own belief system. Unfortunately, after reading Miss Vorreyer’s reference to “pro-choice is cover for for pro-murder,” it is now necessary to speak up.

I may be leaving myself wide open, but I really would like a few questions answered from those adamant anti-abortionists. Who, may I ask, is going to take care of all the children that will enter this world if legislation evolves as you wish? Where will they all go? Will the Newman Center offer shelter, food and education for the first eighteen years of their lives? Haven’t you looked around enough to see the treatment of so many children already? Have you visited your local welfare office lately, or one of the state’s free clinics?

Our world as it is today has little to offer children born into violence, poverty or any one of a number of disfunctional lifestyles. I am not saying these tragedies will diminish by maintaining a woman’s right to choose, but certainly a few more thousand children will compound the situation.

My entire future is devoted to caring for children, particularly those with special needs. If it were possible, and maybe it will be someday, I would open a home for all unwanted children. But for now, I am against bringing children into this world unless someone is willing to love and care for them. Yes, there have been millions of abortions. Do any of you anti-abortionists have room in your homes for a million or so children?

Maybe, just maybe, the answer to this extremely emotional, controversial issue lies in the prevention of unwanted pregnancies. This novel idea holds its roots in education, BEFORE conception, not after. Intervening ex post facto is too late. Continuing as we are, the children are going to pay.

Becki Patis

Graduate assistant

Special education