Bridgemaker – On Abortion And Control

I was once told by an old friend – Mrs. Davidson, in fact – that it seemed as though my role in this world would be to serve as a bridge. A linkage, who might help to facilitate understanding and healthy communication between peoples of differing perspectives. At the time, her compliment was meant within a specific context, pertaining to what I was doing with my life. However, her words have gone on to reverberate throughout these years. To some extent, I’ve absorbed that statement as a sort of core truth, and have sought to embody it. I aim to understand all walks that I encounter as best I can. It seems to be what I am good at. I am the Bridgemaker.

At least, this is the idealized self-portrait that I’ve painted in my own mind. Regardless of whether this title eventually proves itself to be true, it does, at the least, provide me with a mythical explanation as to why my brain functions in the odd ways in which it does – never staying locked into one long-term lifestyle (or career path, community or mindset) for more than a year or two, and seemingly always on the hunt for novel experiences, foreign perspectives and uncomfortable understandings. 

In honor of this past election day – this day of division, in which all politically-weighted minds are distraught with a sense of looming destruction and disaster – I figured that I’d try my hand at exercising this touted calling of mine, to try to bridge the near-infinite divide that now stands between those who would believe that abortion should be controlled (for some, to the point of eradication), and those who would have it left entirely to a mother to decide how abortion should be perceived, and at what gestational stage administering death can no longer be deemed moral. This is, as it would seem, the hot-button issue of this election. Or at the least, it’s the pinnacle talking point of both mainstream political parties, during this one particular carnival season.

---

But first, I must address the skullduggery in the room. Something foul is afoot, on both sides of the unnecessarily binary aisle. There are two extremes, which are being presented and touted as widespread and truthful, when they are, in fact, niche horseshit. The first extreme point of view is that women, writ large, are championing abortion as a beautiful procedure, even to the point in which some are blasphemously celebrating the day in which they had their abortion done. And the second flaunted viewpoint is that Republican voters (and leaders) are trying to make abortions nationally illegal, to the point in which women’s movements across state lines (as well as their reproductive ongoings) will be tracked, thus making them liable to face imprisonment, should they commit the unforgivable offense.

There are indeed people who have vocalized both of these perspectives. They are morons. They are painfully few – a percentage of a percent. But media (legacy, social, and even independent organizations should all be included under that banner) has once again come to society’s aid by gathering up these fringe voices, and amplifying them so that they might be perceived as the thunderous, roaring majority.

Nobody with any power or sense thinks that abortion is good, or that it should be the first response to every unanticipated pregnancy. Nor does anybody want to imprison those who must suffer through such a terrible procedure. No woman, in her right mind, undergoes an experience as traumatic as an abortion, untouched by the litany of what-ifs and uncertainties which follow. And if there are, in fact, women who are capable of undergoing one or more abortions without one bit of torrid emotional struggle…well then allow me to be the first to sarcastically suggest that they should be allowed to undergo their abortions freely – thus withholding whatever psychopathic tendencies that they are exhibiting from the gene pool.

If you’ve fallen victim to the magnifying lies of media (and any political thugs who might capitalize on them, Democrat and Republican akin) – a media which thrives by spreading the most egregious, heinous stories and perspectives, independent of their truth or widespread acceptance – then YOU need to do the work to set those lies aside and return to a balanced perspective. You need to learn to weigh, for yourself, what is real and what is not.

---

Ironically, the most altruistic reasoning that we often see used to argue the merits of unfettered abortion freedoms is the one which I find to be the most unconvincing and unimpactful. 

Brawndo The Thirst Mutilator: It’s Got What Plants Crave!™️

In the 2006 semi-ficticious film Idiocracy, the futuristic Brawndo Corporation – after purchasing the FDA and the FCC – successfully runs a marketing campaign (spearheaded by the catchy tag line above) which convinces the United States to halt the use of water (like out the toilet) for agriculture, and to instead irrigate all crops with Brawndo (an electrolyte-packed sports drink).

Abortion: It’s Got What Women Need!™️

I have yet to ever once hear an impactful individual (on any political spectrum) suggest that, should a woman be faced with the wretched realization that her pregnancy has become a risk to her own life, she should be forced to carry the baby to the gallows term. And yet, the most often repeated line that we’ve heard this election cycle (from the leftward side of the political spectrum, at least) is that, “Women need abortion, it saves lives.” Yes. And?

Nobody is suggesting that women be forced to carry on with their pregnancies, with blatant disregard to their own lives. No politician has ever meaningfully proposed that the right to medical, lifesaving measures should be taken away from the population. Yet somehow this detatched string of logic has become the Idiocratic slogan of the season – a fallacious appeal to emotion which attempts to link the lives which have been (and most assuredly will continue to be) saved through emergency abortion procedures to a vote for one candidate over another.

From here on, I will dismiss the “lifesaving measure” argument as being entirely irrelevant. Your emotions may suggest to you that this is an unresolved matter, and deserving of discussion – however, there is no real discussion being had. It is an already agreed-upon non-issue, which has been resolved, and has never been argued by any respected party within the halls of government. What you heard some snake-wielding nut in south Georgia screaming on a street corner (or on social media) was placed in front of your eyes by Brawndo, in the hope that you would become frightened, and then vote for their candidate, all in the name of saving women’s lives.

---

This Isn’t What I’d Intended

I would have to say that the most convincing argument for the liberal use of elective abortion would be one which I find to be extremely relatable to my own life. For it touches upon a feeling which I have felt in many moments of my adulthood, as have you. “This isn’t what I’d planned for my life. This isn’t what I wanted.”

Having now reached the age of 33, I’ve just begun to shed my childhood “That won’t happen to me” perspective, though only just – there still remain quite a few possible life paths which I struggle to envision myself treading. Old age is a big one (I’ve always held that the day on which I begin to struggle with incontinence is the day that I go skydiving without a parachute). Injury and disease, apart from perhaps cancer, is another path which I find difficult to envision. And finally, as you might have guessed, being father to a child is a role that I simply cannot yet picture myself assuming. I am still, at the time of writing, healthy, childless and single, which, in effect, summates to mean that I am free. I still retain a blessed ounce of independence, which I am now starting to understand can quickly and quietly vanish, should any of those three contributing factors change in the slightest. Once a man finds himself physically unable to defend himself from predation and rivals (I’m speaking from a bachelor caveman’s perspective), or once he commits to protecting a woman whom he loves (thus banding himself to her tribe), he quickly becomes bound to the lives and choices of others. All of his future decisions must now navigate their beliefs, perspectives, desires and needs. His dreams now become the collective’s dreams, and are thus altered to the point of being nearly unrecognizable to his younger self.

And children? Children lead to the very same result, but in a far more lasting manner. Certainly for the women who’ve carried them. But also for those men whom helped to bring the child into this world. Whatever you might say as to the uncaring, selfish nature of emotionally broken men, you will never convince me that a healthy father does not experience the same drives and instincts as a mother, once he first holds his child in his arms. Children are the only real dotted line in this life, upon which a parent signs for a twenty to thirty year commitment of surrendered individuality.

I’ve fought hard to retain my freedom. I would do anything to keep it, for as long as I am able.

I’d like to take a moment to dig further into an issue that I’ve perceived, with regard to child rearing in the 21st century. It is merely an observation of mine on the lives of others, from an outside perspective. As such, it is possible that I might have wholly misinterpreted what I have seen. You can be the judge of that.

Being 33, I find that many of the women in my age group whom I interact with now have children themselves. And this would also include a number of the women whom I might intend to date. I was unprepared for the realities of dating in my thirties – however, I’ve found that even if a girl does have children, and we mutually agree that a traditional, long-term relationship might not be in the cards, we can still learn and grow from each other’s company and kinship, in just the same way as any two individuals who find themselves wandering this life together. Connection is connection, and children cannot get in the way of that. In fact, in the right environment, children might even prove themselves to be wonderful little teachers, as they are not yet burdened by the warped perspectives that we adults acquire through pain, fear and social conditioning. And this indirectly alludes to my great, big observation.

The Problem: This bondage and self-sacrifice which I’ve mentioned, brought upon by children born today…part of it is a natural result of binding one’s self to another human being – particularly a dependent. But there is a side to this that I find to be both unnatural and unnecessary, and is only brought upon the parent as a direct result of modernity, its social contracts, societal expectations and its rules. Look to old-timey, tribal photographs to better understand what I’m pointing towards. You’ll note a severe juxtaposition between true, natural order, and way that we live today.

In the first photograph, an Apache woman hoes a garden, with a swaddled infant strapped to her back. And in another, a group of South American tribal children play together as a unit; a pack of feral, naked little primates, learning and growing together. All, of course, being suspiciously guarded over by one of the village adults, who stands watch far off in the background. And the rest of the village parents? They’re off-camera, presumably living much the same lives as those which they had been living, long before having children.

Now let’s contrast what we can absorb from these two photographs with what we know about raising a child in the modern world. To begin, let’s highlight the fact that the current estimate to raise a single child to the age of eighteen is now $300,000. That’s without considering higher education. But this financial aspect comes secondary to the real issue as I see it: government intervention. There is a proper procedure for how one must raise children within modern civilization. There are rules, and regulatory agencies and authorities which enforce said rules. There are formal education systems to contend with; from the time that one’s child reaches the age of five, and until they are eighteen, parents can expect to be awake and active at 6:00 am every morning to prepare them to be shoveled off to an institutional education [prison] complex. Lunches, outfits, rides to the school or the bus stop, rides to and from soccer practice and organized sleepovers with schoolmates. Juice boxes and Lunchables gallore.

But 6:00 am shouldn’t be an issue, due to that $300k figure that I’ve just mentioned. Mom will be up that early regardless, preparing herself for her office job, toiling ceaselessly for the next twenty years to try to afford the damn thing which she gave birth to. Diapers alone, in the first year, can reach $900 or more. Not to speak of the thousands of dollars in added housing requirements, and supermarket food costs (Mom and Dad likely won’t be growing much of their own food, given that most of their daylight hours will be spent away from the home).

But what if Mom and Dad were to have a mental fit (much like the one which I’ve been undergoing for these past several years), in which they suddenly begin to question all of the rules? What if they were to look at those old-timey photographs, and perceive of a life in which villages would come together as a team to protect and impart wisdom and knowledge upon the children, rather than trying to survive as isolated households (under the tyrannical rule of school boards and HOAs)? What if they chose not to live by modern rule, but to instead pursue this tribal existence? An existence in which they would be able to live by much the same passionate freedom that they did before having children (or perhaps with even more freedoms than I, myself, possess today) – with the only notable concession being that now, when they tend to the garden or harvest a deer, they’ll have a baby strapped to their back. Or, once the children grow old enough, they will require a village shepherd to oversee their free-range education. 

Child Protective Services will see you in the morning. Please have your homeschooling curriculum prepared and ready to present; the truancy officers would like to see your seven-year-old diligently resolving math equations at the kitchen table by 8:00 am.

Child rearing in the modern world is a death sentence to what last shreds of free-spirited liberty that one still clings to. Once a child is born and given its serial number by the state, any hope for spontaneity, or a life lived in accordance to one’s heart and desires is now, largely, lost. And as mentioned, I see this to be entirely unnatural, and perhaps even unnecessary.

The Davidsons? They travelled the country, unapologetically broke, with three children and two dogs in their van. They lived out of tents at times, worked when they could find work, ate well, slept well, and imparted their knowledge to their children. I’m not sure what concessions those two parents might have made in the time since our meeting. Perhaps they did eventually settle for a more stabilizing lifestyle, at the behest of their children. But one thing of which I can be certain is that they have never sacrificed their freedoms because of their children – quite the contrary. I can be sure that they have striven to imbue an unbreakable spirit of freedom and resilience in their wildlings.

And I can think of another couple, who travel around the islands, living aboard their catamaran with two young children in tow; not subjected to the awful, restricting will of the State. They are able to raise their children the old way: as part of their adventure, rather than a hinderance to it.

And yet, I know that the kind of rule-breaking behavior enacted by the Davidsons and their ilk requires great courage and sacrifice, in this shackled, civilian lifestyle that we’ve all accepted. It’s the kind of ongoing courage which few would be able to retain, once the first waves of uncertainty and discomfort were to arise – and that’s even before the inevitable state-agency threats of punishment and child abduction. And so, for the bulk of the modern world, to have a child is to indeed lay down all vestiges of free will and individual sovereignty.

It becomes clear to me why one would consider abortion to be a viable response to the news of an impending birth. Regardless of the circumstances of the conception, the argument remains the same:

“This pregnancy was thrust upon me (I should try to reword that), and threatens to (indirectly) invite great toil and submission into my life. This child (indirectly) threatens to destroy all trace of the dreams which I still might one day bring to life. If I keep it, then I rid myself of the last few splinters of freedom that I stand guard over, in this governed, ordered world.”

---

God’s Will

Christians, in my experience, tend to be terribly inconsistent in their perspectives. My simplistic sense is that this has to do with the acceptance of the old testament as spiritual doctrine, rather than as mere historical background. Within the Bible are contained essentially two distinct Gods, with wildly different temperaments and directives – the old God being one of order, obedience, blood sacrifice, jealousy and control, while the new God is one of forgiveness and freedom, who uplifts mankind to keep trudging up the mountain, who loves unconditionally, and allows for redemption. Of course, this makes for two vastly disparate belief systems, which awkwardly both fall under the same banner. And, as expected, this has led to quite an unpleasant effect for us outsiders trying to coexist with our Christian neighbors. The core, underlying principles of God’s word will frequently (and reliably) flip flop to support whatever egotistical, fear-based outcome that the Christian might be trying to rally support for. If you’re going to suck, then at least try to be consistent with it, like the Jews and the Muslims. But I digress.

With that said, when it suits them, I do find that Christians (at times) cherish one belief which I not only support, but find myself adopting more and more as I progress through my life:

The will of God (as an agnostic, I would tend to say “Life”, or “the Universe”, in reference to the same source) represents a superhuman wisdom which far exceeds my own. If observed and surrendered to, His plan will take me to experiences and outcomes which I never could have achieved, using my own logic and will.

Now, this belief would seem to rely heavily on a spiritual bent, which is entirely incompatible with modern-day Scientism. But it need not be a religious understanding. At its core lies only one critical truth, which could be viewed to simply pertain to human psychology: Release will set you free. In the past several years, the most critical life skill that I have been pressed to acquire is the ability to simply allow that which enters my experience – the people, the events, my desires and my fears – and to flow with it, freely and without resistance. Chaos is the seed of all creation in this universe. Forcing my own limited human designs upon my life serves to tamp out that chaos, and reduces the number of new opportunities and ideas which might have otherwise proven to shape my path for the better. By willfully choosing to study and move with (rather than against) the chaotic events which spring up in my day-to-day, I allow more possibilities to unfold. True, I may still continue to strive for future dreams and goals which I have not yet achieved. But by (partially) removing (some of) the control that I once tried to exert over my existence, my story has only grown to be more interesting. I would personally tend to view this as a spiritual path, due to my experiences. But again, you can choose to perceive this all from a purely secular position, it makes no difference.

By trying to battle against a life-altering deviation – such as an unplanned pregnancy, or sudden poverty, or a crippling injury or illness – you are, in essence, attempting to carve out an entirely new channel for the river of your life to flow through, which continues on the same trajectory as you were traveling before. But some events are simply going to shape our paths, despite what plans which we might have had mapped out in advance. Still, we rack our brains, and work harder and longer, desperately trying to claw our way back out of poverty. We try to force our bodies to heal, or we rigidly refuse to accept new limitations and diagnoses which we ought to embrace and accept (so that we might continue to live the best life available to us in each moment). We hide our scars and disfigurements, rather than cherishing them. And pregnancy?

I would lazily point you back towards Shout Your Abortion. It feels self-evident to say that in a healthy world, news of a pregnancy would be nothing but a joyous moment. And yet, so many are brought to abort because of extrinsic variables. Many of the concerns expressed do ring understandable and heart-wrenching. But in most of the stories I read, apart from those pertaining to the health of the mother, I found there to be a lingering question, hovering in the back of my mind. And if I understood their words correctly, then it would seem that many of the writers themselves were grappling with the same question in the wake of their decision: “Could it have worked out, despite my own understanding of the situation?” My own, limited perspective would hint that most of the insurmountable struggles mentioned could have been surmounted, given time and adaptation. But that feels like an unfair assertion to make, given that I haven’t spoken to all of the women whose stories make up that page.

---

In a best-case scenario, fighting against the flow of your life may consume some of your energy (emotional and otherwise) and willpower, but will also lead to a resolution which your ego finds to be more palatable (for the moment) – though at what cost to your life’s potential, you may never know. However, at worst, you might find yourself expending great energy and willpower for days/months/years on end, only to find that you’ve dug your way further and further into the roots of a mountain which you hadn’t seen through the fog of your own human nearsightedness – be that mountain a physical shortcoming or obstacle, or an emotional trauma which must be reconciled with. You will not successfully dig your way through this mountain, out to the imagined destination which waits for you on the other side. I have tried. I am as stubborn as they come. I dug until my hands were bloodied and scarred. But still, the mountain broke me.

And after it draws from you all of your power, strength and will to continue on, the mountain will likely break you, too – at which point you will have no choice but to withdraw from your quixotic pursuit, drift listlessly back down the artificial channel which you’ve spent years or months digging through, only to finally begin to reanimate and re-energize once you’re back, floating down the river towards whatever life path it was which you fought so hard, and for so long, to avoid.

---

“But we do have the technology to remove a ‘molehill’, before it becomes a ‘mountain’!”

You must forgive me for using the word ‘molehill’ as a euphemism for ‘unborn child’ or ‘fetus’. But I am also pointing towards so much more than that – so many aspects of our natural lives have been amended by our technological era, and have left us in a state in which we could be forgiven for mistakenly perceiving ourselves to be the gods of our own existences. We can now suck the fat out of our grotesque bodies, and carve out cancers, all while having paid servants deliver us instantaneous, sugary meals with cancerously long shelf lives. And we can use wireless devices to call governing bodies thousands of miles away, to have them send men in hovering aircraft to come save us from the situations which we ill-advisedly, though willfully, placed ourselves into. And yes, I must concede, that abortion is a safe procedure, which is likely to only ever inflict damage within the mind and, should you believe in it, the soul.

We can blast away so many molehills, the moments that they arise – thus thinking to ourselves that we can force the hand of God (Life), and that we can chart our own courses, rejecting the input of any so-called “god”. But God is not dead – we’ve merely attempted to bury Him prematurely, under heaps of technological advancement. And with a patient smile, He waits.

For this conception of control that we perceive ourselves to have over our lives is but a hollow illusion, as portrayed by corporate ad campaigns and modern box office hits. It is a shattered pretense, destined to one day crumble for each us. For me, it was around the age of 22 that the shards began to clink to the floor. But the real legends and stories of humanity – the old tales of the elders – tend to dispense a very different kind of wisdom: that Life and the gods have presented to us the gift that is our story, and we have but one choice: embrace it and enjoy it as it unfolds, as it sees fit to do so. We are the same as the deer or the fish – the path that we stumble upon is the one which we must navigate, rooted in this present moment.

This, I believe, is the core of the argument that most “pro-lifers” have against abortion (we’re all “pro-life” for fuck’s sake). True, there is a moral element that goes unstated. But the more central stance is that one cannot self-serve as a replacement for the chaotic, wondrous will of God/Life/Universe. No matter what technologies our ape minds possess, we will inevitably always remain too shortsighted to see what changes and joys will come from what we presently perceive to be mere “obstacles” and “mole hills.” The unborn child, which you would so freely cast out of your way in the name of charting your own course, might very well be the bend in the river that sends you towards wondrous new lands, though you will never see those lands. And until you finally learn to release the modern control which you have come to expect, you will stagnate and fester in the swamps and caverns of your own forging, exhausted from all of your digging.

---

Epologue

One issue that justifiably must be collectively decided upon by our society is the gestational stage in which an “abortion” can no longer be called that, but instead “murder”. A living infant is legally bestowed protections under U.S. federal law the moment that it exits through the birth canal (technically, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 provides legal protections as early as the embryonic stage, or week 3, with provision 919a barring the prosecution of those conducting consensual abortions). But a fetus only two days away from successful, natural (or induced) birth is theoretically just as likely to survive if it were to be born those two days prior – and so an abortion two days before the 40th week logically cannot be treated in the same way as an abortion performed six weeks after ovulation. I will intentionally maintain a wide birth (that’s a pun, for levity) between myself and this particular discussion, as I do not feel it is mine to weigh in on.

Partly, this does boil down to personal morals. We are nothing without our own intuitive guidance. However, our gut instincts seem to have become atrophied from millennia of convenience and safety. And thus, the law becomes necessary, as does community support and care for those who are in a period of uncertainty or crisis. There is no end to the amount of good that Christians might do for the world, were they to desire to live by the example set by Jesus. Unfortunately, modern Christians cannot seem to do anything in this world without marring it with the ulterior motive of proselytization.

It is to these unappeasable religious types whom I now feel compelled to address – as you are among the worst of us when it comes to the temptation to control and destroy.

---

The technology has been developed by man to quickly and safely terminate a birth – as was the will of God. And many women today feel drawn to utilize this technology – as is the will of God. 

By attempting to control a woman’s ability to abort her pregnancy, you are attempting to exert your will upon your world and your life, in no different a manner than is she (via the lives that parallel your own). You, yourself, have become that which you decided (in your god-like wisdom) ought to be expelled from this earth.

God does not need your help, nor does Life nor the universal balance of all things. Balance always wins out.

Whether you would choose to admit this or not, an unborn child has no greater advocate in this world than its own mother. And should she choose to destroy that child before it is born – however heart-breaking this might be – so long as infanticide is ruled out, this remains that woman’s own moral quandary between God and herself, and not a legal one for you and I to involve ourselves with. And your version of a moral existence, which you self-centeredly seem to think is universal in nature, is of no use to another individual, facing an alternative set of circumstances, while treading down their own, unique life path. Their river will take them to new understandings and awarenesses when God determines it to be the right time for them to do so. Not you or I.

Until that day does come, your God would be far better served by you if you were to silence the commotion of your mind, revel in His wondrous creation, and make efforts to get yourself into the fearless state in which you are capable of showing love for all elements of said creation – regardless of whether they possess the same moral perspectives and beliefs as yourself. The lion is equally worthy of adoration as the lamb which it devours.

---

So what would I do, were I to thrust myself (there I go again with that awkward phrasing) into a predicament in which I would be asked for my input – by the woman who I had been with – as to whether or not she should consider an abortion? Again, I can only refer to the idealized self-portrait which I’ve painted in my head. 

The costly answer to that question would be to use absolutism to clearly state now what I would unequivocally say then. The affordable answer would be to tell you that I would try my best to release control. I would consider the woman to be an inseparable element of the will of Life (God), as both she and I (and you) most assuredly are. And as she was the one, in this little equation of ours, to be bestowed with the gift of transmutation and creation, I would try to see her will, her fears and her instincts to be god-breathed and purposeful, and worthy of making the final call. I would try my best to not force the outcome to go either way, but to instead embrace whatever arrives as my intended life path. To raise a child in this hellishly modern world, or to continue on untethered; both possibilities bring with them terrific drawbacks and awesome blessings. Both demand willful release.

I’m too much of a fool to know much of anything for certain – not what I nor you nor society should do. All that I can say with any measure of clarity is that I cannot control. I never could. If God/Life/Spirit one day intends for me to have a child, then to fight it will only lead to more stagnation and deconstruction in my life. And I’ve had just about enough of that these past few years. I think I’d like to float for the moment – the River knows the best way to go.