LETTER: Being ‘pro-life’ should continue after birth

To the Editor:

I am writing to ask our state legislators to act in the wake of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling overturning Roe v. Wade.

The court’s decision takes away the federal protection of a woman’s right to decide whether or not to have a child when she becomes pregnant, essentially giving individual states the power to decide if their citizens must carry pregnancies to full term, regardless of whether or not the pregnancy was planned, intended or wanted.

Many states have banned or will ban abortion procedures on some level in the wake of this Supreme Court decision. In the coming weeks I fully expect Indiana to become one of those states.

I know that the impetus for the coming ban in Indiana is the belief, held by many fine Hoosiers, that life begins at conception. I’ve heard the sermons (Jeremiah 1:5). I get it.

I know that these bans aren’t about taking away a woman’s right to decide what happens within her body; they’re about protecting (in the eyes of our Christian neighbors) the lives of the unborn. “Pro-Life” is surely an unassailable position. It implies that anyone with a dissenting opinion is “anti-life.”

I want to take a moment to assure our Christian neighbors that is not the case. We are all “pro-life.” Where “pro-choice” advocates differ is in how we choose to value and protect that life. There are many “pro-life” reasons for a woman (or a couple) to make the difficult choice to terminate a pregnancy. Perhaps the couple is struggling to make ends meet financially, and they would be unable to provide for a child. Maybe a woman was in an established relationship with her partner, but he has since left her. Maybe a young woman was taken advantage of at a party. Maybe the birth would result in severe medical complications for the child or the mother.

In each of these cases, it could be argued that the way to value people’s lives is to allow them to make the choice (should they choose) to not carry the pregnancy through to term, protecting them (and their potential child) from a life of difficulty, hardship, strife, bitterness and struggle. But I am not writing to argue that.

As the Vatican has said, “pro-life” also means taking steps to affirm the quality of life of the children we are blessed with. If Indiana truly wants to be “pro-life,” I hope our state representatives and senators will put taxpayer money where their mouths are and increase funding for preschool and early childhood education. I hope they will take steps to protect our students at school by passing common-sense gun control measures and crack down on vapes and e-cigarettes. I hope they will push for more paid parental leave for Indiana parents and press for high-level prenatal care for expectant mothers. I hope they will fund more mental health resources for our young people. I hope they will bolster funding and resources for adoption programs, foster care and the Department of Child Services.

I wholeheartedly agree that life is precious, and I call upon Rep. Beau Baird and Sen. John Crane to show that they agree as well. Gentlemen, I know you will vote for a restrictive ban on abortions because in Indiana it will get you re-elected. I won’t attempt to change your hearts or minds on that point. I do ask, however, that you join with your colleagues across the aisle and work together to also pass legislation that will strengthen our social programs here in the Hoosier state.

Show us that you value the lives of the unborn just as much after they have left the womb. That would also get you re-elected, and it would earn you my vote.

Heath Pruitt

Greencastle