The Right To Choose

Leigh Travis, Ph.D.

On approximately the l4th of November, l989, Pennsylvania passed a controversial abortion law making it mandatory that a wife inform her husband if she wishes an abortion. Thus, under this law, the woman does not have "the right to choose" an abortion simply because she wishes an abortion, and the unborn embryo is, at least potentially, given "the right to life" providing his/her father decides that such a "right" is in the best interests of the unborn embryo.

Of course, the law pleases no one at either extreme of the controversy over abortion: "right to lifers" will argue that the law doesn't go far enough, "right to choose" will argue that the law strips the mother/woman of her "right to choose" what to do with "her body" and thus the dust has hardly settled yet, nationwide, because of one state's action.

The right to choose is, however, a much larger issue than usually addressed in the furor over abortion: the issue is, paradoxically, more simple, and far more agonizing.

I have two sons and one daughter, roughly a year apart from one another in age, all of them are now eighteen or older. My daughter works, part time, at a Woman's Crisis Center and attends college full-time, my youngest son works in the tire business, goes full time to college, my oldest son works with closed-head injured people (mostly children) as a therapist and will be attending college, full-time, starting January, 1990. Three very different people indeed.

They were raised, however, by the same rules from childhood to age eighteen. They were taught how to make choices, and the importance of realizing that the freedom to choose meant living with the consequences of the choices made. But when the boys became eighteen their entire world of choice changed for them: they had to register for the draft lottery, they had no choice. If their number comes up, they will have no choice but to obey their walking orders (neither of them has expressed any conscientious objector ideas or positions); but my daughter, now age 21, does not have the threat of that compulsion darkening her horizons each day and can, furthermore, freely choose - in Michigan - to have, or not to have, an abortion. She is free to exterminate, has the "right to choose" to butcher an embryo, whereas my sons do not have "the right to choose" not to exterminate other human beings who are as unknown to them as is an unborn embryo to my daughter, if my sons are drafted into a war-time situation.

Furthermore, my daughter does not have to fight in wars to defend her right and that of other females to exterminate embryos; but my sons do have to fight to defend my daughter's right to exterminate an embryo she is - or, if my sons marry, their wives may be - carrying.

Now the Civil Rights Act(s) clearly states that we cannot discriminate on the basis of (among other things) sex: but clearly the draft is 100% discrimination on the basis of sex and, in most states other than Pennsylvania, "the right to choose" abortion laws also discriminate 100% on the basis of sex; in both instances each law strips the other sex entirely of its "right to choose" (to be drafted, or not to be drafted, to abort, or not to abort, an embryo).

Thus, on the basis only of sex, my sons can be compelled to fight in a war somewhere to heroically protect and defend the right of their wives, or girlfriends, or sister, to choose to exterminate potential citizens of the country my sons may die to protect: my sons have no right to choose not to fight to protect the right of women to exterminate embryos - theirs, or a man's (who "owns" an embryo, anyway?).

This is a palpably and excruciatingly gross, insane, inequity - Pennsylvania has at least attempted to level the playing floor in the area of the "right to choose" to abort; when will we the people (Congress) pass a law stating that under the Constitution and Civil Rights Act(s) men AND women, equally, have no choice but to be drafted to defend and protect each other's rights and liberties?