Random though about early optimization

Republicans and the the right of a rapist to raise your child

by Lola Aronovich. Original in  Brazilian Portuguese here. This was posted as a way to put things in perspective to Brazilians but it seems incredibly relevant to the current American political climate so we decided to translate it and post it.

It is tempting, when debating the legalization of abortion with a pro-life-until-the-birth-but-after-that-it-doesn't-matter, to ask whether there is a contradiction in allowing the interruption of pregnancy in cases of rape. After all, in the case of rape a fetus would still be aborted as in all other cases of abortion.

If abortion is murder, as they say; if the fetus is a fully formed autonomous child, as they insist... how can they accept abortion being allowed in cases of rape? If the father is a rapist, is the "child" worth any less than if it were not a rape case? Or are we giving a woman who is going through a great deal of suffering the right to decide what to do with a pregnancy that only concerns her? So, if she has the right to have an abortion in this case, why wouldn't she have the same right in other cases?

Of course, in a debate on the legality of abortion in cases of rape we will always hear "the child is innocent" (suggesting that the woman, who is a victim, is not – sounds familiar?). Likewise, in a debate about the legality of abortion in cases of pregnancy-related risk of death, someone will probably  say that it's okay if the mother dies, because "God knows what is best", because "He wanted it that way". There is no way out: in the end, when it comes to criminalizing abortion, we always fall into a religious debate.

I also find it interesting to ask what the pro-life-of-the-fetus-above-the-life-of-the-woman thinks about allowing abortion when pregnancy is dangerous to the woman's life. In answering, they have to do a great deal of juggling to hide the underlying idea behind being anti-abortion: that the life of a yet-to-be-completely-formed being is more important, more valuable, more complete than that of a woman.

Yeah, it's tempting discuss these issues. But it is also extremely risky. It's risky because, given  the lack of arguments to justify why abortion should be allowed in one case and not in all others, what could happen is that these pro-life-until-the-birth-but-after-that-it-doesn't-matter would abandon the idea of allowing abortion in such cases and just say "You know what? We'll ban abortion in all cases".

Does anybody doubt that the anti-abortion activists are dying to ban abortion in all circumstances? Just see what is happening in a country where abortion has been legal for decades: the U.S.

A Presidential election will take place in a few days, starting the first week of November, and the Republican and Democrat candidates are tied in the polls. Obama led a certainly disappointing government, but giving the power back to the Republicans seems just insane. Especially if you are a woman. Lately, most Republican leaders have been making increasingly disastrous statements. So much that the Romney's "binder full of women" slip of the tongue seems only silly.

Just as a reminder, let's mention some recent disasters: Rush Limbaugh called a law student a bitch after she requested that health plans include the distribution of birth-control pills (you know, this insignificant thing that may prevent unwanted pregnancy and, thus, the need for an abortion in many cases). Rep. Stephen Freind said the chances of a woman getting pregnant from rape are "one in millions and millions and millions" given that "when that traumatic experience is undergone, a woman secretes a certain secretion, which has a tendency to kill sperm”. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee said that "rape has created some extraordinary people." The Senate Candidate Todd Akin declared that in cases of "the female body has ways to try and shut that whole thing down." And so on.

As Massachusetts governor, Romney was pro-choice (because being against choice in such a progressive state would not help him get the votes he needed). But now, in order to garner the votes of the most conservative parts of the country, Romney aligned himself with the right-most wing of the Republican Party. He chose Paul Ryan (a Catholic who claims to be anti-abortion in all cases) as Vice-presidential candidate. Romney also pledged to oppose abortion without any exceptions, including cases of rape and life-threatening circumstances for the pregnant woman. Can you see how big a setback this would be?

It is hard for us Brazilians to realize how big a setback this is, because we live in a country with some of the most backwards laws on abortion. Only this year we passed legislation allowing pregnant women to have abortions in cases of anencephaly. We do not know what it is to be able to have an abortion without risking a jail sentence or putting our lives in danger because of the rather unsafe and clandestine procedures.

But imagine living in a country that has allowed abortion for decades, and suddenly all these rights are about to be taken away from you. Imagine being raped, getting pregnant (it is estimated that between 25 000 and 32 000 American rape victims get pregnant every year), and being forced to have a child because the falsely-secular government says so.

But calm down, it gets worse! In 31 of the 50 states, a woman who gives birth to a rape child does not have legal grounds to prevent the rapist from having parental rights. Should the rapist want to – and, according to attorney Shauna Prewitt, herself the mother of a child conceived in a rape, this is nothing unusual – he could demand custody or visitation rights, just like any other parent could.

Imagine then that you get pregnant after a rape, and choose to have the child (keep in mind the legalization of abortion provides choice, it does not demand that you have an abortion), even if the society thinks this is a questionable decision (after all, the mother of a child conceived in a rape "must hate her child", otherwise it wouldn't be a "real rape"). Just imagine your rapist, that guy you would never want to see again because you want to be able to get over what happened, imagine that man being able to go to court and request visitation rights, or even shared custody of your child. Imagine your rapist every Friday knocking on your door to pick up your child to spend the weekend. Imagine having to leave your child to a rapist.

The government that decrees that you, for the simple fact of being a woman, have no rights over your body is the same government that ensures your rapist would  be not only able to pass hs genes on but also raise this child.

Rape ends up being a good deal, at least for one of the involved parties. Does this sound like a nightmare come true? Sadly it is not. It is just a future with religious fundamentalists in power.