Unfortunately, every day, we see more and more humans treating other humans as non-humans. The leading cause of this? The Supreme Court made it legal with its ruling in Roe v. Wade that a choice can be made to terminate a life during all nine months of a pregnancy for any reason. With this came the ideology that abortion is health care. This opened the door for future court decisions that are nothing short of preposterous.
For instance, a pregnant woman has a right to deliver a child in the healthiest way possible, and in 1995 the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled this should apply to abortions, too. Doe v. Gomez decided that taxpayer-funded abortions will be provided to those needing medical assistance just like funding the birth of a child. "Access" and "reproductive health" became key words in this decision. For if there is access for a woman to bear a child, it would be discrimination to deny access to a woman seeking an abortion.
This was one case, but with due process other cases could follow the same rationale. For example, it is a person's right to eat the healthiest food possible, and it is discrimination to prohibit those on general assistance access to wild game by not funding them to buy firearms. In Minnesota it is a right to bear arms, and they already receive funding and have access to buy processed meats. These assumptions that abortion and eating wild game are rights could lead to the erroneous descriptions of health care and health food respectfully.
In comparison, the only truth to both assumptions is that a creature is killed.
Timothy Helwig
ADVERTISEMENT
Duluth
