People’s lives aren’t for you to politicize
What people do with their bodies, who they marry, and the existence of discrimination is not for politicians or anyone to argue about
Jenny Han / Asst. Opinion Editor
If 2020 has taught us anything, it is that we are quick to label flaws in our country as political issues. Ending police brutality is, apparently, a political issue for the 2020 presidential candidates to debate. Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation as the newest Supreme Court Justice has many people speculating a reversal on the Court’s opinion on abortions and same-sex marriage. However, the protection of people’s rights, marginalized or otherwise, should not be considered political. These are human rights issues and we must treat them as such.
For the sake of this argument, a political issue requires legislation and the use of taxpayer dollars. For example, the ideal federal minimum wage is a political issue because it would require the government to impose a minimum wage nationwide and increase taxes.
However, the rights of Black Americans, women, and the LGBTQ+ community are not political. The method to uphold these rights could be considered political. For example, determining if racial training should be mandatory and how much federal funding Planned Parenthood receives are all examples of political issues because they have fiscal effects. However, arguing whether these underlying issues exist is another story.
The BLM movement highlights the generational mistreatment of Black people in the United States. Some examples of this mistreatment range from police brutality, microaggressions, and the school-to-prison pipeline. These very evidently show that the United States is rooted in anti-Blackness.
We do not have the right to judge if such an issue exists because doing so dismisses the pain and anger of the Black community. Labeling the BLM movement as purely political implies that the legitimacy of Black lives can be determined on a ballot. Black lives should be treated with the respect of any other person in the United States. The general backlash against the phrase “Black Lives Matter” proves that America is generally anti-Black and that is a human rights issue.
Some may argue that abortion laws are political because they could increase taxes that Americans need to pay. However, the 1977 Hyde Amendment forbids using federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest. The transition between abortions not funded by tax dollars to outlawing abortions raises several questions. If the government hypothetically abolishes abortion, how would they compensate for that? Would they make forms of birth control more accessible to all of their citizens to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Would they make accurate sex education mandatory nationwide to decrease the number of teen pregnancies? Would they bring about improvements to the child adoption process and services if the mother cannot take care of their child? Would they mandate that all companies need to improve their maternity leave policies? The proponents of the pro-life movements fail to answer these questions.
Many are pushing for the abolishment of abortion laws due to their religious preferences. If someone chooses not to have an abortion because of their religious preferences, that is respectable. However, it is unconstitutional to force an entire nation to adopt anti-abortion laws due to a religion that not everyone practices. The first amendment forbids the passing of laws “respecting an establishment of religion.” Church and state need to be separated. The government exists to protect women’s rights rather than take them away under the pretext of religion.
Many also want to defund Planned Parenthood because it is a commonly known clinic that allows abortions. However, Planned Parenthood provides a plethora of services other than abortions. Planned Parenthood also provides birth control, pregnancy testing and services, sexual health services such as STD testing, screening, and treatments, HIV services, hormone therapy for the LGBTQ+ community, cancer screenings, and general health services for both men and women. In particular, those who are low income often rely on Planned Parenthood for reliable treatment and services they otherwise would not be able to afford.
Defunding Planned Parenthood, puts the lives of many Americans at risk, which doesn’t seem very pro-life. Additionally, the choices one makes for their own body are individual decisions rather than societal ones. Therefore, my issue with anti-abortion laws isn’t with the actual abortions themselves. For a small, powerful group of people that are primarily men to determine what women can or cannot do with their bodies is inherently sexist and discriminatory. That is why the push for anti-abortion laws should be considered a human rights issue rather than a political one.
Some speculate that Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, may be overturned. The fact that there is a possibility of this happening is concerning. Who someone chooses to marry concerns no one but them and their spouse. Using religious beliefs to justify abolishing same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, and in this case, homophobic. If the Supreme Court overturns Obergefell v. Hodges, it would be a huge step backward for the LGBTQ+ community. Considering how the legalization of gay marriage does not incur any fiscal effects, those who wish to criminalize homosexuality do so purely based on bias and hate. Labeling same-sex marriage as a political issue implies that LGBTQ+ folk do not deserve the chance to have a happy, long-term relationship. We all have the right to marry the person we love and taking that right away from anyone is a human rights issue.
People are not chess pieces that politicians or others can move around to push their agenda or beliefs. Everyone has meaningful perspectives, struggles, and lives that enrich our society. To have others determine someone’s own value is hurtful and diminishing. We need to stop treating the people’s rights as debatable, especially when America is a country that prides itself on its freedom. No one has the right to determine someone’s inherent value in society and enforce how others should live their lives.
The views expressed in the editorial and op-ed sections are not necessarily those of The USD Vista staff, the University of San Diego, or its student body.