I'm not "pro-life" in the typical sense of the word. I could get behind a "pro-life" movement that was actually pro-life. For example, we know that women in poverty are more likely to chose abortion... so we could advocate and adopt national policies that reduce poverty. We could make adoption a more reasonable option for people who don't typically adopt (but would consider it if it were at all feasible for their situation) ... like, gays, lesbians, people with more modest incomes or single parents. By and large the people who are vehemently pro-life are also the same people who are vehemently anti-poor and anti-welfare. This seems ridiculously illogical to me. If someone could explain the logic behind this, I would listen and appreciate it. We also know that for a long time, back alley unregulated abortions were a leading cause of death for women of child bearing age... how on earth is legislating abortion back to back alley clinics pro-life???

So, I went to a planned parenthood rally a few weekends ago. Not because I love abortion. But because I love affordable and accessible birth control and checkups. I want them to exist when my daughter is broke and in college. The organizers of the rally were with the ISO (19 year old socialists from the liberal arts college in the hippest part of the metroplex) and they're kind of obnoxious. They were chanting things about "free abortion on demand" which I think is kind of damaging to the case we should be making. Sure, the idealogical cause behind the legislative assaults on planned parenthood maybe an attack on abortion. But the result of those attacks is only going to increase abortions... If you take away access to affordable birth control for the most at-risk portion of the population, and take away a well known and visible place to get well-woman exams, STD tests and education.. then you're only going to eventually increase the rate of abortions. I feel this is the argument that should be made. And I feel the outrage of the movement to defend PP is not making that case successfully. But you can't tell a 19 year old socialist anything.

I also feel like a pro-life movement must be against the death penalty, vehemently pro education and social services for societies most vulnerable and for an affordable and accessible health care system and fiercely pro-kindness. The absence of those qualities makes your cause seem hollow and hypocritical and ignorant and anti-woman.

I also have issues with some who are loudly pro-choice. The statement that I often hear is how it's ok to have an abortion if you find your child is going to be born with some disability. So, of course this is the choice of the parents and I wouldn't seek to take away their right to choose. But this statement is flippant, and ignorant and probably damaging and probably eugenics. The idea behind it is that people who happen to have disabilities have no worth, are nothing but burdens on their families and society, and have no reason or right to exist. This bullshit needs to be challenged with education and a strong disabilities rights movement.

Oh, I've also decided that many recreational drugs (not all of course, but many) are human rights issue. And need to be combated as such. I did a fuck ton of drugs in my youth and the anti-drug PSA's and 1980s DARE classes did nothing to prevent it. And left me feeling very unmoved. But knowing the kind of kid I was, PSA's about the gross human rights violations that take place inside the drug trade would have made a much greater impact on my psyche. I demand PSA's that show us how cocaine is made, who it's made by, what it does to beautiful cultures and maybe someone should do something to figure up how many murders per gram of coke on average or something like that.