by G E Barr

Created on: February 12, 2009   Last Updated: April 16, 2009

THE BROAD SCOPE

First of all, it might be viewed as a form of genocide and while many Americans live the "live and let die" philosophy when it comes to children, they don't want to pay for abortions for other countries. Think about it. American's didn't get to have the sex and they didn't get to see the great sunset on the horizon in Kenya, so why should they pay for the abortion? Further, it doesn't seem right to pay for domestic issues in Mexico.

There are many abortion nay sayers who don't think much about a girl being raped throughout her childhood. It goes on too much for me to be too idealistic.

So, while I understand why this decision on behalf of President Obama is not good, I also understand that the world is headed for a neutral place when it comes to sexual abuse. Which makes me angrier than abortions.

According to a National Organization for Women website which cites a 2006 study, women in Africa are dying and being maimed due to unsafe abortions. They are going to have the abortions, no matter what. The thinking behind the Mexico City Policy is that the women will be able to go to sterilized clinics to get the abortions done.

Self inflicted genocide.

Personally, I am against this policy and I will expound as to why. First of all, America is sinking economically and we really cannot afford to help other countries kill their babies. Second of all, it won't be emergency situations, such as rape and incest, it will be abortion on demand. A prostitute might have 5 to 8 abortions a year, in America. Imagine the anarchy currently going on in Africa and well, you can see this could get very expensive.

Thirdly, and I want to make myself very clear, I am not neutral on the issue of sexual abuse. The Mexico City Policy appeases the pain of abortion in a sense for the woman, who, no doubt was raped from childhood.

On the other hand, I am for the Mexico City Policy and here is why: When men are not held to any standards and are no better than roaming dogs, it goes with the territory that there will be many victims. Nobody wants to bring the rapists to any sort of justice. So, they merely appease the women with abortions. The women also, having been conditioned to that lower form of sex, that is, many partners, also agrivate the situation.

I am for the Mexico City Policy not because I want to appease women, but because it is not so hard for me to imagine how terrible their lives are and bringing a baby into it seems unconscionable. The suffering of the child, seems to me, to outweigh the tragedy of abortion. If you consider the international sex slave trade as well as the AID's epidemic, I cannot see how one could not at least feel compassion for these women. It must be a terribly miserable existance.

There are terribly sad situations all over the world, and America too. You would think that these countries would tend to their domestic issues and take some form of social responsibility. They are literally, not only not evolving but giving the outside consensus continuing and obvious signs that they never will.

Financially, it seems unresponsible of America. Ethically, it is iffy. Unless you just cannot empathize with the horror of being pregnant in a hostile and unevolved environment.

Learn more about this author, G E Barr.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.