Where politics is personal not partisan

Bodily Autonomy for Me, but Not for the Unborn

Fetus
Bodily Autonomy for Me, but Not for the Unborn

Body Autonomy for children is all the rage right now among the left.  What they leave out, though, is a huge discrepancy that calls their cause into question.

There has been a shift in recent months, especially on the left, toward respecting the bodily autonomy of children. Three stories in particular stand out:

Enedina Vance posted a picture of her infant daughter on Facebook with the child’s dimple pierced. In the caption, Vance wrote, “I think she’s gonna love it!! I’m the parent, she is MY CHILD, I will do whatever I want! I make all of her decisions until she’s 18, I made her, I own her!! I don’t need anyone’s permission, I think it’s better, cuter, & I prefer her to have her dimple pierced.” Vance didn’t actually pierce her daughter’s face, but was attempting to make a ham-fisted equation to circumcision. Ignoring the plethora of research that says circumcision has medical benefits beyond physical appearance, Vance admits that she was looking to stir up controversy, calling circumcision “cutting” and said she opposes it.

In another story, a new parenting trend urges parents to ask permission from their infants before picking them up. Nisha Moodley of San Francisco says she asks son Raven for his permission before picking him up. “Because we want him to know his body is his, and that others’ bodies are theirs, and no one gets to make choices about someone else’s body.” Moodley wants to end rape culture by teaching her son not to touch another person unless he has their consent. Jo Wiltshire, parenting expert told The Sun that while it’s important to teach children that their bodies are their own, that “One of the wonderful things about families is also the spontaneity of human affection and the ability to demonstrate that – so I’d say we need to make sure that ‘formalizing’ hugs and kisses doesn’t go too far and make children fearful or suspicious of all contact.”

READ
Why There Are Costs to Moral Outrage

Transgender activists in Canada are pushing to remove gender designations from all new birth certificates. Kori Doty’s child, Searyl, has no assigned gender because Doty himself (herself?) identifies as a non-binary transgender. “It’s up to Searyl to decide how they identify, when they are old enough to develop their own gender identity. I am not going to foreclose their choices base on an arbitrary assignment of gender at birth based on an inspection of their genitals.” Never mind that gender is not, in fact, an “arbitrary assignment of gender” but a chromosomal predisposition determined at conception, Doty will not label Searyl until the child is old enough to decide. They also want to force other Canadian parents to conform to this choice, by denying those parents the option to identify their sons and daughters correctly on birth certificates.

The three interwoven threads of these stories are all that the left has a sudden, newfound respect for the bodily autonomy of children and infants. Curious, then, that they continue to push for publicly funded abortion on demand, at any stage of pregnancy, regardless of the bodily autonomy of the fetus. With news that Justice Anthony Kennedy is considering retiring from the Supreme Court later this year, the panic that Roe v. Wade will be overturned is palpable. Carl Reiner, in an op-ed address to Kennedy, asks him “How would you feel, while reading your newspaper, seeing a headline that read ‘Roe v. Wade Overturned’? Do you see how this could ruin a good meal? A good life? A great country?” Celebrities are urging Senators to protect abortion as “the most basic of all human rights.” The media repeats the lie that abortion is only 3% of Planned Parenthood’s services (when, in reality, it’s a majority). Women will die without legal abortion.

READ
Politics and Princesses - The HPV Vaccination Conundrum

The tried and true arguments come out in force, as well. An unborn baby isn’t a human being, but only a potential human being…it’s the mother’s body, and therefore it’s her choice, etc. The convenient scientific ignorance of the left is stunning. A child is, in fact, human (and male or female) from conception; a mother does not have two hearts, two sets of lungs, and two distinct sets of DNA, therefore it is not her body.

So which is it? Babies and children are autonomous beings who cannot be identified by their biological gender (transphobic!), circumcised (mutilation!), or touched without permission (rape culture!), or babies aren’t human beings, their bodies belong to their mothers, and they can be aborted for any reason whatsoever because of “human rights”?

Consistency would be nice, but that’s never been the forte of the morally relativistic left. It’s time we started making them explain their inconsistencies, and watch them defend the indefensible.

image_pdf

Last updated by .

Amy Curtis
About Amy Curtis 25 Articles
I am a mom, nursing student, and conservatarian. I've been a teacher and have a MA in English. I live in Milwaukee, WI (for now) and look forward to starting fresh in a new city soon. When I'm not working or in class, look for me soon at The Binge!

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply