Pro-Choice - I wish it were a Political Party

It’s been a while since I’ve posted on my own blog. Some of it was because of laziness, most of it because of being busy or distracted. Or busily distracted, in particular on another blog where I've been making new [insert wisecrack-look here] friends.

At a friend’s suggestion, I was going to post about pro-choice in terms of reproductive rights. I began to but my thoughts wouldn’t jell. I realized that part of that is because of all the focus and interest I’ve been applying to pro-choice in terms of tobacco use. But that seems to pale against the importance of Roe vs Wade coming up before a more conservative (read that damn-near-fascist) US Supreme Court.

And now I wonder – isn’t it the same issue applied to different circumstances? What are civil liberties, really? For that matter, what is ‘the rule of law’?

In my opinion, both law and civil liberties are abstracts, regardless of how precious the forgers of our Constitution and Bill of Rights held them, and all the philosophies they drew on to support their vision. More than anything, they can be called ‘understandings between parties’ but please note, understanding in that context doesn’t mean compassion or acceptance. I use it more in terms of common awareness and active recognition.

For instance, it’s understood that if someone has a gun pointed at me, I am definitely not in charge. I can make my own decisions regarding that situation but it’s the one with the most compelling influence who’s calling the shots (pun intended). My own choices are a) surrender b) rush for the gun c) risk getting shot either way.

Here's my own take on both those things utilizing the following definitions;

‘Civil liberty’ - function: noun: freedom from arbitrary governmental interference (as with the right of free speech) specifically by denial of governmental power and in the U.S. especially as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights -- usually used in plural*

‘Law’ - 1 a (1): a binding custom or practice of a community: a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority (2): the whole body of such customs, practices, or rules*

Notice “customs, practices and rules”. Such a thing as a 'law' does not exist in a tangible sense. It’s a concept, delineated in the written word with accompanying actions and followed to a certain degree but other than that, it's just a custom, a practice, a set of rules established and (hopefully) agreed upon by any general or particular society. So, if law does not exist, neither does civil liberties.

Scary, huh? Don’t get nervous though. Hold my hand and follow me a little longer.

In breaking down the phrase of civil liberties and starting with ‘civil’ - 1 a: of or relating to citizens b: of or relating to the state or its citizenry*

Now let's go to ‘liberties’ - 1: the quality or state of being free: a: the power to do as one pleases b: freedom from physical restraint c: freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e: the power of choice.*

Any grouping of people, no matter how small or large, is really a crowd unless there is some kind of mutual understanding between them. It doesn’t become a community until shared interests or pursuits are involved. It doesn’t become a state unless laws are created.

But why would laws be created in the first place? So that we can continue acting on and enjoying our shared interests without getting in each other’s way (too much) with our un-shared interests.

Regardless of all the groupings that we can classify ourselves in (or not) there is still one bottom line foundation to the concept of ‘society’; it is based on individuals attempting to co-exist for mutual safety, support and company.

Each one of us is an individual, and each one of us are somehow connected to the rest of society including, paradoxically, by being distanced by it.

Each time we marginalize an individual’s choices we marginalize a group or subgroup. We are eliminating a possible strength and creating a possible discontent which can grow into an opposing community or group.

Yet each time we insist that our individual choices are the only things that matter, and that the rest of society needs to make its own way around it, we distance ourselves from that society. We engender a negative response from it and compromise the very thing that helps us to survive.

Somewhere in between those two extremes is the society that our founders intended and the government to maintain it; but not for the sake of a government, nor for the sake of a particular society, per se – but for the sake of the individual.

That’s why I wish there was a Pro-Choice party.

Or another way to phrase it; I do not exist for the government nor for the dictates of any corporate or social entity. If anything, they exist because of and for me as well as for every other individual involved.

As I have a right to my life as well as responsibility for it, that means I also have rights regarding those entities…
which includes a “love tap” upside the head when they get too full of themselves and overstep their boundaries into my life.

* Merriam-Webster Online