The Right To Life
More columns
written by Laramie:
Your comments about this column are welcome ~ e-mail Laramie at
The Spectator
founded 2004 by ron cruger
A place for intelligent writers
A place for intelligent readers
Laramie Boyd
Coachella: Spending Strangley
Things Change
Don't Forget to Tip the Waiter
The Hoax Tip
Give and Take
Are the good times really over?
Enough is Enough
A Bright Line
What did you say?
The Soft Touch


  How long has it been since anyone in Congress, or for that matter, anyone in the White House, has reminded themselves, and all Americans, that we are "endowed with certain unalienable rights", including "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", and that if the government "becomes destructive of these ends", it is the "Right of the People to alter or abolish" that government?  Related to this issue are questions that have been tossed around for quite some time, answers to which are not easy. "What does "life" really imply? At what point in being pregnant does "life" begin, and, is it a  mother's right to abort that which makes them pregnant?  President Obama supports the pro choice group Planned Parenthood, which fosters freedom of reproductive choices. This means, in part, individuals make their own choice, when they become pregnant, as to whether or not they bear a child, or have an abortion to prevent one. Other administrations have supported various aspects of a woman's right to abort also. So another question arises. Does having an abortion give a fetus the right to life?  Does the current "spin" over when life begins, whether at the third trimester, or at conception, or some other split second, rationalize the fact that the fetus was not given the right to be born, since maybe it wasn't really alive? Wouldn't the old saying that there's no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, as you either are or you aren't, imply that there's no such thing as being pregnant and  having a little bit of life in the womb, as it's either there or it isn't? Has our government, then, at one time or another, consistently supported programs that do not give a pregnancy the right to its fulfillment, the right of a life to be born, and given only lip service to that right of life? And if such is the case, has our government at times become destructive to, and denied, the "right" to life? Shouldn't the views of a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, on abortion and the right to life, be as important as their views on any other issue? And shouldn't the people somehow be reminded more of their right, if not to abolish, but to alter their government if that government is destructive of that right? This in spite of the fact that there are millions of women who do not believe that their fetus has a right to life, believing instead that it is not alive. Doesn't it seem, at times, like the voting process falls short of the will of the people and the kind of representation they are entitled to and have a right to?

Here They Stand