Deafening Silence

The "Day of Silence" happened October 19. People walked around wearing red tape over their mouths with the word "Life" on it. That takes a lot of courage, especially considering how easy it would be to make fun of someone with tape over their mouths, regardless of what was written on it. I'm sure there are a lot of pro-life people here on campus, this being the bible belt and all. There was, however, a sort of retaliation by a few people. One student walked around with a poster-board vest that listed all of the monsters throughout history who weren't aborted. This is where I get on my soapbox. I know I said that I wouldn't talk about politics much, but to me this isn't really a political issue. It falls into the category of right and wrong, which is my area of interest. First of all, the potential of the babies being aborted doesn't really factor into whether it's right or wrong. Sure, there's potential for great good and great evil, just like with the rest of the human race. I've heard supporters of both sides make that kind of argument, but it doesn't really touch on the moral side of the issue.
If abortion were nothing more than a women's rights thing, it wouldn't be controversial. My beef is that you're affecting someone else, not just yourself, so there's more to be considered than just what's convenient or what makes the mother happy. Really, the whole issue depends on whether or not the unborn can be considered human. If they're not, then it really doesn't matter what we do to them, but if they are, then abortion is murder, and there is absolutely no way to justify it. If you were to ask a pro-choicer, they would probably say that a fetus isn't human because it's attached to the mother, therefore making it her property. That's bogus. If merely being attached brings ownership rights, then what does that mean for siamese twins (twins joined together at birth)? Does one have ownership over the other? Of course not. I think what pro-choicers really mean when they say that is that the baby is totally dependent on the mother, and therefore doesn't meet the criteria for being human. Here's somthing to ponder: What about the baby as a newborn, or an infant, or a toddler? They are totally dependent on others for their survival. Should they have rights? Another argument against the unborn's humanity is that they lack the ability to think and act like other humans do; essentially, they're not as developed and capable as the rest of us. If that's the case, what does that mean for the mentally ill and those with birth defects or disabilities? Do they qualify for the right to live?
Abortion is nothing short of murder. I think that one day, people are going to wake up and realize the truth. Just like the other injustices over the past, such as slavery. Abortion can be likened to racism. You have a group of people denying the humanity of another group, for the purpose of convenience or because they actually believe it. I think that when people come around, they'll say "abortionist" a lot like people say "racist" today.
Okay, I'm through ranting, so I'll get on to regular life. I met with my new advisor yesterday, and it turns out I have to take 12 hours of Spanish to be a journalist. Short of Mexico taking over America, I can't see how this will help me deliver the news. Oh well. College Algebra is really the only class giving me trouble. I'll be glad when it's over and I won't have to take any more math classes. I might be writing a series of dental articles for the ReView soon. Yeah. My dentist, who happens to be a family friend, is going to give me his ideas today while he works on my teeth. I guess you could say he's going to "fill me in." I'll let you know how that goes. See ya.