Second-wave feminism was at its peak in the 1970s. Throughout the decade, laws restricting access to contraceptives were overturned, women’s studies programs were developed at universities, the Equal Rights Amendment was on the edge of ratification and, of course, a ruling was made on Roe v. Wade, the monumental Supreme Court case that deemed abortion a fundamental Constitutional right.
Since then, second-wave feminism has run its course, third-wave feminism has made its impact and modern-day women find themselves closer to gender equality than they have ever been. Yet, the 2016 presidential election has placed the United States in a strange political time machine of sorts.
Cries to “make America great again” have revealed just how easily decades of progress for women’s rights could be unraveled under one particular presidential candidate. The 2016 election has the Roe v. Wade decision under siege. Republican nominee Donald Trump has expressed interest in appointing justices who would reverse the case’s outcome, which would threaten women’s access to safe and legal abortions.
During the third and final presidential debate Wednesday night, Trump stated “… in the ninth month you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby. Now, you can say that that’s OK, and Hillary can say that that’s OK, but it’s not OK with me. Because based on what she’s saying and based on where she’s going and where she’s been, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month, on the final day. And that’s not acceptable.”
What sensational diction.
First of all, Trump’s inaccurate description of late-term abortion has been largely debunked by medical professionals. “Ripping babies out of the womb on the final day” simply does not happen. Second, the late-term abortions, abortions taking place 21 weeks into pregnancy or later, which Trump so adamantly oppose only make up about 1 percent of all abortions performed. Nearly all of these take place because the baby has a severe birth defect that is incompatible with life.
There appears to be dangerous misconceptions that are promoted by pro-life politicians whenever they get the chance. They propagate the idea that women choose to have an abortion without thinking, that women abuse their right to an abortion, that deciding whether to have an abortion is not the most difficult decision those women ever have to make.
Because in almost every individual case, the decision is incredibly difficult. The list of legitimate reasons to opt for an abortion is long. Women choose abortions because they are unfit or unprepared to raise a child. Women choose abortions because their own health is at risk. Women choose abortions because the baby has a severe disability. Women choose abortions because they became pregnant as a result of rape or incest. These decisions must be made between a woman and her doctor, not by a politician who lacks the empathy, understanding and medical background to assess each nuanced situation.
But, quite frankly, the reasons behind choosing an abortion shouldn’t even matter. What matters is that women possess the constitutional right to choose. It is imperative that this right is respected and protected by our nation’s leaders. To strip women of the right to choose whether to carry a pregnancy to term is to take away their ability to be self-autonomous; there should be no government interference regarding what an individual does with her own body.
One must acknowledge the fact that reversing the legality of abortions would be unlikely to drastically reduce the number that occur; rather, the procedures would simply become more dangerous for the women who undergo them. The battle for safe, healthy, legal operations was hard-fought. During this campaign season, it is essential to vote for the candidate who will preserve the outcome of the fight for abortion rights, not for the one who will take them away.
