Abortion should be between a patient, their doctor, and the god of my choosing
Good morning. Last night, Ohio voted to enshrine abortion rights in its state constitution. This is a monumental and important victory, but there are still abortion bans across the country — in large part fueled by the work of zealous evangelicals. With that said, today I have another excerpt from my debut book of satire This Won’t Help to share with you, below. I hope it helps.
Abortion Should Be Between a Patient, Their Doctor, and the God of My Choosing
Across the country, folks with the fear of the Almighty in their hearts are performing one of the bravest acts possible: bullying health care providers. They are driven by the doctrine of their faith, which tells them to make the ultimate sacrifice: Hold a big, weird sign.
But simply shouting irrelevant Bible verses through a decrepit bullhorn is, in many ways, not only anti-religious but flat-out wrong. For if we were to follow the lead of the Almighty Father of Jesus himself, all parents would dispose of their children a few months after they turn thirty-three.
That edict may come as a cold shock to the system of many fervent Christ-botherers, but I assure you it comes from that most famous of biblical precedents: the day upon which God gave up his son’s life because he was in his thirties and still living at home.
To be sure, the divine power has countless names and faces, and if we are to maintain freedom of religion in this country, we cannot in good conscience continue to so narrowly define the parameters of abortion solely by the teachings and interpretations of one particular faith or sect. And so I say that abortion must become a decision that is made between a patient, their doctor, and the god of my choosing. And I have chosen Saturn.
Yes, Saturn — known to the Greeks as Cronos, the Titan who devoured each of his children at birth. Which is why every child born from today onward must be immediately eaten alive by their parents.
This may seem wildly severe to the layperson, but if we are to understand religion as integral to medical decisions, then we must accept and encourage the extremes of our many varied beliefs. By what right are any of us the arbiters of what faith must guide our mortal laws? If the right is theirs, then it is as much mine. And the god I have chosen gives us a clear, concise directive: Eat. Your. Kids.
Behind the writing
First, some exciting news. This Won’t Help was named a New Yorker best book of the week last week. That’s really great, but more important (to me) is what you think. If you’ve already read This Won’t Help and you’ve got some nice things you’d like to say about it, I encourage you to leave a review on Goodreads or Amazon.
Now, about the above excerpt. It’s one of a couple pieces in the book specifically on abortion. The other essay mocks the states’ rights argument against choice. Both are borne of my own personal connection to the fight for abortion rights.
This past May, I testified in front of the Maine State Legislature in support of the passage of a bill similar to the amendment passed last night in Ohio. I also wrote a Letter to the Editor for the Portland Press Herald that never ran. This was that letter:
As the son of a mother who had an abortion, I support the passage of LD 1619, An Act to Improve Maine’s Reproductive Privacy Laws. First, an indisputable fact: Abortion is healthcare. And like all healthcare, abortion is and must remain a medical determination — not a political or religious one.
The decision to have an abortion should be between a patient and their doctor. Nothing else — neither faith nor government — belongs in that discussion. To allow such interference is a betrayal of every individual’s right to privacy, autonomy, and self-determination.
The end result of Maine’s current law is that providers in Maine can diagnose a condition later in pregnancy, but may find themselves legally prohibited from treating their patient. This is a senseless, cruel, and unnecessary outcome, and has far-reaching implications in treatments for miscarriages and pregnancy loss.
To quote Speaker Rachel Talbot Ross, “No one should be forced to remain pregnant against the advice of their trusted medical provider, and Maine’s law as written is doing just that.” I am here today because my mom was able to make her own decision 50 years ago, just weeks after the passage of Roe v. Wade. I urge our legislators to pass LD 1619, and give that same freedom to every pregnant person in Maine.
LD 1619 passed, thanks to the tireless efforts of inspiring grassroots activists, medical professionals, and many others, and went into effect less than two weeks ago.
There are a slew of arguments anti-abortion rights activists use: it’s against their religion; it’s an issue that should be decided by the government (but not that government); and most recently in Ohio the argument has focused around parental rights over the actions of their children.
That last one, a recent adoption by anti-abortion lobbyists, should make one thing very clear: every argument against abortion is based in, or results in, control. Control of other people and their bodies. This is so very often the root of hallmark political issues: autonomy vs control. But abortion is healthcare, and healthcare is personal. All people have a right not to be pregnant. In Ohio, that right is now law.
That’s all for today — thanks for subscribing, and see you next week.
By what cooking method should we prepare them, Lord?