To the Editor:

I’ve noticed, that with what appears to be seemingly somewhat rare exceptions, that the majority of those members of the “Pro-Life” movement, whether it be those in the legislative, or judicial, all the way down to the pundits, or even just your every day opinion contributors, have one overriding demographic characteristic in common. It’s not that they are self-identified Conservatives, or Republicans, or even Christians. I don’t have the exact statistics, but judging by the data and information I have come across, they appear to be not exclusively, but overwhelmingly, members of the male gender.

Setting aside the fact of the undue burden and stress that the recent Supreme Court ruling has inevitably already caused thousands upon thousands of women, their families, their livelihoods, and overall well-being, the last time I checked, it takes Two to Tango.

It makes me wonder how zealous some of these members of the male anti-abortion movement might be, for example, that if as a condition of every abortion denied, a paternity test must be administered, the biological father identified, and that biological father be legally held financially responsible for the entire life of the child until he or she turns 18 or 21.

And if the biological father is unable or unwilling to comply, then the state must publish this biological father’s identity, charge him with a felony, and then the state would be legally required to then backfill the cost for having and raising that child through that state’s taxpayer money, including child care, health care, and education, and have a separate budget line item each year published and disclosed to their public and taxpayers as to how much this is costing them.

Seems only fair to me.

The problem I’ve noticed is that the majority of the ant-abortion folks out there are all “Pro-Life”, that is, until the baby is actually born. Then, well, sorry, then you’re on your own. Doesn’t matter whether or not the mother or biological father are in any position to bring to term, whether it be financially, health wise, emotionally, family dynamic or otherwise.

Unintended pregnancies occur. And they don’t discriminate between party or religious affiliation and identities. It does not matter how well one may think that they have been brought up, or how well that they think that they are bringing up their own children. The only thing that they all have in common is the gender of the impregnated party. If the idea is to outlaw abortion outright, then it seems more than reasonable to me that the one who did the impregnating should also be held to the same standard of distress, and that the state, or country, doing the outlawing, should take over the responsibility of providing for the economic, health, emotional, and educational development and requirements of that child.

Holding my breath now.

Leland Farnsworth
Massena