This may shock many of you, but I say, YES, a woman should have the right to choose, but not the way you may think.
If you knowingly throw bricks from an overpass, the law will say that you made a choice to commit an act that put the lives of others in danger. It’s the same reason that it’s against the law to yell fire in a movie theater, because of the potential harm to others caused by one’s careless actions.
Likewise, it’s against the law to shoot a gun into a crowd of people because you’re going to causing bodily injury or death to someone in the crowd. A person makes a conscious decision before pulling the trigger, not after. Afterward, the person is held accountable for the decision they made.
I have always contended that if someone drinks alcohol knowing that they are going to be driving afterward, that this is making a premeditated choice to possibly cause harm or death to other people on the road. Premeditated assault or murder is a serious crime and alcohol related incidents should be treated the same way.
But what about a woman’s right to choose? Generally, the argument made by liberals is that a woman should have the right to choose what she does with her body, and in general, I agree with that. However, when it comes to pregnancy, I believe her right to choose concerns her actions leading up to getting pregnant. She chooses to have unprotected sex, generally outside of marriage. Her right to choose ends there.
After a woman learns that she is pregnant, her choices now affect another human life. The only difference at this stage between choosing an abortion or throwing bricks off an overpass of a busy interstate is that the abortion is certain to take a life where the brick poses the possibility. Both should be illegal for the same reason.
Therefore, a woman’s right to choose is before she gets pregnant, not after. She needs to accept the consequences for her actions and if she doesn’t like those consequences, then she shouldn’t have done what she did to get herself into that situation.