Abortion on the Reservation

With the new additions to the Supreme Court of the United States, apparently some state legislatures are making overtures to outlaw abortion in their particular states. They are doing this based on the assumption that the newest members of the courts, if given the opportunity, will vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade, which opened the flood gates of murder on countless millions of unborn babies.

Today, I read an interesting twist in this story, one that I had not considered previously. According to an article at MSNB.com, Cecilia Fire Thunder, President of the Oglala Sioux Tribe says that if the South Dakota legislature votes to ban abortions in their state, she will establish a women’s clinic that offers abortions and other women’s services on sovereign tribal land where state law doesn’t apply.

The article is unclear on how much federal law would apply on the reservation if/when Roe vs. Wade is overturned by the US Supreme Court, but that isn’t what caught my attention. What caught my eye was President Thunder’s justification for her potential actions:

“We just want to make sure that something is done for women who make that decision. All we can do is provide that to them, no questions asked. It’s their choice. It’s between her and God and that unborn baby. And I honor that.”

Am I the only one that sees the fallacy of her statement?

All we can do is provide that [abortion service] to them, no questions asked.”

WRONG! There are other options – not providing abortion services, being the most obvious other option.

It’s between her [the mother] and God and that unborn baby. And I honor that.”

WRONG again! Once President Thunder provides abortion services to circumvent the law of the state, it is no longer only between the three parties she mentioned: mother, God, and baby. She and her clinic workers (some would call them murderers and accomplices to murder) have entered into the equation. Additionally, if it is only between the mother and the baby (and God) and she honors that, why is she helping the mother eliminate one of the parties in the equation? Who is listening to the baby’s voice in this discussion?

I’m sorry President Thunder, you haven’t taken the moral high ground as you try to persuade in your explanation of your intended actions. Your tribe should be embarrassed at your shameful leadership and threat to their future existence.

In the circles I move, it is common to bless a person we admire with the words, “May your tribe be increased.” I couldn’t say this to you because your threatened actions and attempt to justify such is so morally reprehensible. However, I’m sure some will think you are a “god-send” and want to bless you in such a way. Strangely, though, in your case it would be terribly ironic because Native Americans identify themselves by tribes and the clinic you are offering to open will be used to kill future generations of the Oglala Sioux Tribe as well as outsiders. In other words, the more tribal leadership like yours prospers, the less chance of survival for the Oglala Sioux Tribe.

Please, for the sake of the future of your tribe, for the sake of babies not of your tribe, and for the sake of what is right under heaven, rethink your position.

Speak Your Mind

*

%d bloggers like this: