The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.

The Spectator

Helping to shed a new light

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Lyssa Beyer

In the world of abortion, it’s not often that we get to hear a balanced discussion. We have the pro-life idea seemingly saying everything after conception is murder. Then the pro-choice side who wants to even keep the partial birth abortions on the table. It’s interesting that both sides like to leave out some critical facts about their arguments.

First of all, I would like to see some facts about when a fetus becomes a baby. In the pro-life argument, the morning after pill is considered murder. But just because a cell divides does not mean I’m going to name it Billy and take it to a ball game. I need some proof, I need to know at what point we call those cells a separate life.

The other thing I do not understand is why pro-life people protest at, or near, Planned Parenthood in Eau Claire, which does not perform abortions. In an overpopulated world of teen sex and AIDS, please stop blocking a place that gives out free condoms. I support your right to protest abortions, but drive to a place that actually does them first, OK?

On the pro-choice side, the basic argument is that a woman should have the right to do what she wants with her body. I am totally for that, but the problem is at some point it goes from her body to two bodies. This is where there is a disagreement.

One thing the pro-choice side never wants to talk about is that they are not really pro-choice. They are pro-second choice. You chose to have sex. Yes, sex has a ton of benefits, but those benefits are there so humans will reproduce. What this is is the “have your cake and eating it to” campaign. At some point that fetus does become a baby, with its own body.

In writing this editorial I was lucky enough to have a source speak out from a side that I do not remember ever hearing from. I do not like to use unnamed sources, but in this case I am going to. The person I interviewed will simply be referred to as “Unnamed.”

Writer: “Before we get into your views on abortion, I would like to hear a bit of your story and why you did not want to be named in the article.”

Unnamed: “Well, it’s kind of simple really. Because I always hear from people who want to tell me all about their views on abortion and I have heard from a few people that were raped, but I never hear from the child of a rape, and well that’s what I am. I am the result of a rape.”

Writer: “So is that why you wanted to be unnamed?”

Unnamed: “I want to be known for who I am, not how I got here.”

Writer: “I can understand that, but wouldn’t it be easier to not do this interview?”

Unnamed: “It would be. I thought about that a lot, even after I told you I would do it. I mean there is always the chance that people would figure it out and then that’s all I’ll ever be to them. The thing is, I’m tired of hearing from others how I should think. I should be for choice or abortion is murder, how many of them live with their so called convictions? My Mother and I live with it every day. You know, some times you do hear from people that were raped and them, I listen to.”

Writer: “Just to make sure, you are OK with me printing your interview?”

Unnamed: “Yeah, when I found out I told people that were close to me so I know that you knew about it.”

Writer: “So what are your views on abortion?”

Unnamed: “Well, it might surprise you, but I’m pro-choice.”

Writer: “I would like to know why you are OK with being pro-choice? This would mean that you are OK with the idea of being aborted.”

Unnamed: “Yeah, don’t get me wrong. I’m glad that I’m around, but I remember when I was a kid, asking my mother about my dad. I don’t think she was ready for that yet, so it hurt her really bad. For years, I thought that I somehow put my mother through all that pain. Then I realized that I didn’t do it, but my father did. Now I realize that no one has the right to put people through that much pain. Forcing rape victims to have the child can do that.”

Writer: “I know some people who are against abortion, but think there should be a law allowing rape victims to still have abortions, so do you feel the same way?”

Unnamed: “Well, let me ask you this – if you allow rape victims to have abortions, but non-rape victims can’t have abortions, then aren’t you forcing rape victims to admit they were raped? Yeah, talking about rape can help them and it’s the only way to put the rapist behind bars, but what if they are not ready to talk about it yet? That’s why you can’t make abortion illegal. Who gives you the right to force a rape victim into anything that they are not ready for?”

Writer: “I have to admit I have never thought of that.”

Unnamed: “Yeah, and I would like to talk about one more thing and then, if you don’t mind, be done.

“Anti-abortionists always seem to say that they are out there because of compassion and they’re doing God’s work. They need to have some compassion for the people driving by. You don’t know what the people seeing the signs have been through and some of us don’t want to be reminded of it on our way to work.”

I hope that I have given you a few things to think about and I feel “Unnamed” gave us all a few things to consider, but I have one last point to make. You can be for or against abortion, but the truth is the abortion issue does not belong in the government. Laws are too hard and unfeeling to tackle the case by case issue that abortion needs to be. So let’s take this issue from the courts and put it exactly where it needs to be – in research, facts and discussion. When doing this we must remember that we have the right to speak out, but as “Unnamed” showed me, we also have the right to shut up and consider a different point of view.

Acheson is a freshman print journalism major and assistant photo editor of The Spectator.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Comment

The Spectator intends for this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Comments are expected to adhere to our standards and to be respectful and constructive. As such, we do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous. Comments are reviewed and must be approved by a moderator to ensure that they meet these standards. The Spectator does not allow anonymous comments and requires a valid email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comments.

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.

The official student newspaper of University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire since 1923.
Helping to shed a new light