Opinion

Baxley: It's not reasonable to expect to control someone else’s body

Posted 12/7/21

Ivan Eland’s recent commentary could not be more pertinent and enlightening (“Eland: Having empathy for potential adversaries is not weakness, it’s smart!,” Daily Independent, Dec. 2, 2021).

To Our Valued Readers –

Visitors to our website will be limited to five stories per month unless they opt to subscribe. The five stories do not include our exclusive content written by our journalists.

For $5.99, less than 20 cents a day, digital subscribers will receive unlimited access to YourValley.net, including exclusive content from our newsroom and access to our Daily Independent e-edition.

Our commitment to balanced, fair reporting and local coverage provides insight and perspective not found anywhere else.

Your financial commitment will help to preserve the kind of honest journalism produced by our reporters and editors. We trust you agree that independent journalism is an essential component of our democracy. Please click here to subscribe.

Sincerely,
Charlene Bisson, Publisher, Independent Newsmedia

Please log in to continue

Log in
I am anchor
Opinion

Baxley: It's not reasonable to expect to control someone else’s body

Posted

Ivan Eland’s recent commentary could not be more pertinent and enlightening (“Eland: Having empathy for potential adversaries is not weakness, it’s smart!,” Daily Independent, Dec. 2, 2021).

Any fool might think those who yell loudest yell best.

An effective person recognizes the need to “seek first to understand, and then to be understood” (Crediting the late Steven Covey). This axiom applies beautifully when conflict arises over the need for vaccination against COVID, the need for wearing masks indoors while in public and in discussing highly volatile issues, like abortion.

In the waiting room ... when a man was told he must put on a mask, he defiantly declared, “I have cancer and I have been told [at a local hospital] that I don’t have to wear a mask!” When presented with the information that immuno–compromised individuals were waiting, he declared, “I don’t believe it!”

When “personal freedom” bumps into scientific reality there are information venues in abundance refuting the need for vaccination. Let’s face it, controversy sells advertising and the most obtuse blabbermouths are ready to swarm in.

Recognition of private circumstances and the fact that we humans all favor life (excepting possible sociopaths) and it is time that the term “pro-life” be eliminated in favor or freedom of choice advocates versus those believing themselves preferable arbiters of how a woman responds to unwanted pregnancy. There is emotionally laden language on both sides.

Remember please: No one comprehends the circumstances facing a woman who for a variety of medical and practical reasons terminates a pregnancy.

There is no greater sanctity of personal freedom than that over one’s own body! What is the life experience of someone who would presume to control another person, please!

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here