Column for March 17, 2011

While writing this column, I have been thinking a lot about life and death. I have three family members who’ve had cancer scares this week alone. I am writing this on a Friday afternoon. After I finish writing, we will be packing to head to Florida for the funeral of my cousin’s husband, who died of cancer last week. On top of that, the big news lately has been the earthquake in Japan that has killed hundreds of people and sent a tsunami that has also killed hundreds thus far.

After writing the column I did last week about proposed legislation on abortion and miscarriage, the wife and I have been talking about life, about family, and about where we would like to go with both. I do hold life sacred, and lament its loss. I will be doing so with my cousin within 24 hours of my typing this and I am heavy hearted for the Japanese people killed in a huge earthquake. I lament the loss of so many babies to abortion and natural causes, which believe it or not, did not sit well with some people.

People from all over the country and sometimes the world read my columns, since I also publish them on the internet, but only after they have been published in print here, first. I have gotten some hate mail from internet readers already about last week’s column. I was informed that it is hypocritical of me to be supportive of “making abortion illegal but then offering little to no aid to mothers who have need to financial aid/public aid...people who are pro-life and want children to be born regardless of circumstance should be pro-welfare, too.”

My retort is “that it is not the purpose of government to provide your food, your housing, or your health care. A government that can provide your means can and should therefore be able to dictate your procreation activity limitations. It is in no way incongruous to say you are not allowed to kill a baby but then not supply you the means by which to raise a baby. There are plenty of adoptive parents waiting in line to have a baby (the discussion of adopting has just recently been ongoing in our own home). Why is it the responsibility of the populace to provide financial aid to a woman who did not exercise proper judgment, restraint, or birth control methods? Her decision as to whether or not to accept the responsibility of parenthood was taken the moment she opened her legs to a man. It is not hypocrisy to tell an individual to accept personal responsibility for their actions and procreative activity. Nor is it hypocrisy to tell a woman that either she takes care of her own offspring or allow someone else to love, care for, and raise that child.”

While Governor of Minnesota, Jesse Ventura was confronted by a single mother. She screamed at him about how she was left with children and bills by a man who decided he no longer wanted to support her or her children. She demanded to know what he was going to do for her in terms of college tuition so that she could get a college degree at taxpayer expense and a new job. I sympathize with her, I truly do. I have family members who have had the same situation, whether because of disability, divorce, or death. I am going to visit one such relative this weekend, as stated. Ventura’s answer to this woman was blunt and honest. I am probably slightly paraphrasing here, since I have searched extensively on the internet and have found neither the video nor the transcript of the exchange in question, but I remember watching it several years ago. Jesse said, “Why is it the government’s responsibility to take care of you and your children because you married a loser?” That seems harsh, but it is entirely correct.

Is life fair? Of course not. If it was, people who want to have babies would not have sterility issues or miscarriages while crack heads and high school girls still wouldn’t get pregnant or at least would not be able to slaughter their young. If life was fair, people wealthy enough to support dozens of children would not be sterile by either nature or choice, and the poverty stricken that don’t desire children would bear sterility, instead. Nevertheless, we have a God given responsibility to embrace life and provide for those under our charge.