:: The S.I.C.L.E. Cell ::

my view from the prison of a SICLE (Self-Imposed Child Loss Experience) due to debilitating maternal disease
:: welcome to The S.I.C.L.E. Cell :: bloghome
SEARCH THE CELL Google Custom Search
| thesiclecell@yahoo.com ::
:: After abortion[>]
:: RealChoice[>]
:: Silent Rain Drops[>]
:: Stanek![>]

:: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 ::

This is just weird when you consider that we live in a society that values so much the freedom to do as we please with our own bodies...that it has deemed plucking a child from his/her life support and discarding him/her (i.e., abortion) acceptable.

Thus a sixteen-year-old can walk into Tiller's in Kansas and abort her baby at 9 months, but the same youngster will have to fight a legal battle if she would rather employ homeopathy than chemo to treat her cancer.

With the exception of abortion, laws are all over her body: she can't smoke, she can't drink alcohol, she can't sell her body on the street, can't smoke crack, she can't go to an R-rated movie etc.

Don't get me wrong. I think it's great that a child is not allowed to inhale toxins into her own lungs, is not allowed to introduce toxins into her digestive system. I think it's wonderful that women are not allowed to sell their bodies on the street (not because I want to spoil their fun or control them, but because I believe with all my heart that prostitution is not good for women physically, emotionally and spiritually).

When a 17-year-old girl is not allowed to refuse a blood transfusion but is allowed to have her child ripped from her womb something is awry. How is "my body, my choice" only applicable in the situation that actually extends to someone else's body?

Interesting logic.

:: ashli 10:23 AM # ::

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?