Vindiction.

Recently we’ve had a debate in one of my classes involving abortion rights and how they are affected by our government and the upcoming election. I chose not to participate in this debate because of one simple thing: everyone responded with one of the two favorite slogans of the two sides of the formal debates; either “A woman has the right to choose what she does with her body.”, or “Abortion is murder; the woman makes her choice when she decides to open her legs.” No one was capable of any rational thought of their own. This would have continued until the end of the period, had the teacher not stopped the debate and assigned a new topic. I believe anyone has the right to do whatever they want with their body, or their mind for that matter. I believe a person should be able to do this. A person can make decisions; a person is capable of rational thought. People, on the other hand, don’t seem to be capable of this. People can’t make a single rational decision for themselves. People divide themselves into two groups, constantly fighting over who’s “right” and who’s “wrong”., based on two separate ideals which completely oppose each other and proclaim their beliefs to be “un-compromisible”. Perhaps there is a reason for this deadlock, perhaps its human nature; but whatever the case, this is what brought on democracy. A democracy id defined as the peoples right to “choose”. Democracy is a virus, mainly because of the fact that people “choose” their leader or solution to a problem based on group with the largest number of supporters. How is this fair? All this proves is that the group partial to the winning leader or solution was more successful at converting those whom still have slim chance of free thought to their array of programmed responses and ideals, as opposed to their competitors. A person has the right to choose, not people. When people choose, two sides of an issue are realized, while any other possibilities are thrown to the wind. This never leads to the best solution to the problem, just the simplest and easiest to follow. People can’t make well thought out decisions, a person can. The masses should have their major decisions made for them, not by a dictator, and not by an omnipresent God. I believe the solution lies in the hands of technology, after all, computers don’t make mistakes. This brings me back to abortion; what’s the use of being conservative or  pro-choice when both are fundamentally impossible? “A woman has the right to choose what she does with her body.”, I believe this is true, but when you become pregnant, its no longer just “your” body. By supporting the “pro-choice” group and abortion, you are giving the woman the right to choose to have an abortion, but your also taking the right of the child to choose life or death; condemning “pro-choice” to become another contradictory way of thought. The conservatives, on the other hand, believes abortion is murder, and should be prohibited, taking the choice of whether or not to have an abortion from the would-be mother. Given the fundamentals of a democracy, everyone has the right to “choose”, forcing the conservative group against the very governmental system they were founded upon. Another issue that always seems to arise in a formal debate is the price of supporting a child. In all major cities where an abortion clinic is accessible, there will most likely be an adoption agency present. The “pro-choice” group also states that many of the would-be mothers can’t afford the hospital bills that come hand-in-hand with child birth. Why isn’t there a government program in place to pay for this if you can’t? Wait, there is. It’s called, Medicare. Why is it in such a bad state? Why are millions of people, hundreds of leaders, dieing without the slightest hint of a “choice”? Why does the government that provides everyone else the right to “choose” strip them of theirs? The answer is simple: Democracy.