Other nations deprived of the means to decide

Katie Duncan

The state of affairs in this country hangs on a hinge of fine balance. It sways back and forth with the same arguments trying to adjust to a new equilibrium. Should we allow same-sex marriage? Do we send troops overseas? Can we fund international abortions?

That hinge swung backwards so swiftly with that last one that the door between the choice of choice itself and the choice of life closed swiftly, without room for debate.

Since abortion is already legal in Canada, I will spare you the redundant message of pro-choice in this country because we already have it. However, I will not let go of the decision that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative government recently made of not funding abortions in other countries, most importantly, the third world.

Picture this if you will: how hard it might be for you to raise a child in Canada today. You might have to take a second job, you might need Social Assistance but you have the luck of the draw on your side. A strong healthcare system where you need not pay for your baby’s cold. A problematic, but still existent daycare system and the help you might need to get an education for a chance of a better job.

Picture this life, how hard it might be to raise a child in North America, and magnify this problem in a country where poverty, homelessness, job scarcity, war, genocide and disease are common occurrences and threaten the fragile state of life a parent already has without adding an unwanted pregnancy.

Now I understand there are some legitimate outcries from the public. They want to know why they should have to pay. Well I say to you, why did we have to donate to Haiti? Why did we have to send troops to Afghanistan? And why do we continue relief efforts all over the world?

The answer is you don’t have to, but what your actions say is that you choose to.

Your religion might be a factor but what bearing should your religion have on a person who does not share those same views?

Your own personal choice will most definitely have something to do with it, but why should your choice hinder the ability of another’s?

You might even think to yourself, why can’t education, condoms and birth control be enough? The answer is at your doorstep, because its not even enough here, in our country.

How ignorant of us is it that we can support abortion for ourselves but not another human being; that same human being who was probably never asked if they wanted a choice. Sadly, we don’t even realize the privilege and freedom that is a choice.

A sociologist named Charles Wright Mills sums this idea of freedom of choice, perfectly: “Freedom is not merely the opportunity to do as one pleases; neither is it merely the opportunity to choose between set alternatives. Freedom is, first of all, the chance to formulate the available choices, to argue over them — and then, the opportunity to choose.”

Your anonymous comment may be printed in The Ontarion's print publication.