Sometimes I can’t help but shake my head at the blatant selfishness of some liberal policies. Columns and letters riddle this opinion section it seems almost every day now discussing “a woman’s right to choose” — a conviction fueled by the “no consequences” movement. This attitude is indeed present in the overwhelming majority of abortions — the 99 percent that are done after the mother has consensual sex, according to www.rightforlife.com. It is these cases that the majority of pro-life proponents take issue with.

Pro-choice advocates continue to ignore the elementary fact that a pregnant woman is carrying a baby. It sounds ridiculous, but it is apparently hard to comprehend for many people. While the beginning of life is important, pro-life Americans must focus their argument on multiple issues regarding abortion, because I fear that for many of them, it doesn’t matter whether what they are ending is a life or not, as long as they don’t face the consequences.

With a little common sense one can easily conclude a baby is alive. If anyone can bring an inanimate object to my attention that has or will develop a brain, let me know, and I might change my mind.

Pro-choice advocates often refer to the baby as a “fetus.” The only function of this term is to de-sensitize people to the developing human being. It’s always a little humorous how an inanimate “fetus” becomes a living “baby” simply by the mother’s decision that she wants it.

Whether he or she is called a baby or a fetus, a developing human being is still a human being. Homo sapiens reproduce Homo sapiens — that is they do not reproduce cats or dogs that we can do with as we please. The last time I checked you couldn’t end the life of a human when it pleases you.

The difference then must be that one human is in a womb and dependent on his mother to live, and the other is not. This argument of dependency on one’s mother for survival doesn’t hold up either. A child relies on its parents until it is several years old. A baby cannot survive without assistance from the mother, in or out of the womb.

What about the needs of the baby? Shouldn’t the baby have the right to come into the world loved and cared for? Let me introduce you to a program we have in America called adoption. Even without this option, no American would want our government to set a “standard of life minimum,” in which couples with little income should not have a child by the government’s decision.

Most arguments, however, focus on the desires of the mother. If the mother desires to rid herself of the burden of a life she created, then she should have that right because she feels like it. It’s her body that she can do with as she pleases. That truly touching, wonderfully selfless argument then allows me take a weapon and use it to kill another person, as it is my body and I can do with it as I please. Both of these actions involve the use of one’s body to end someone else’s life.

A common argument is that if abortion became illegal, America would see a terrible increase in “back-alley abortions.” By this token, we then should reject any ethical policy that limits personal action because some people may not obey, and hurt themselves. Drugs and murder are good examples. Drugs and murder should not be illegal, because if they are, some people may decide to do them in an unhealthy environment, bringing harm to themselves. Forget personal responsibility for your own actions — we can’t make laws based on what hurts others, because people may then hurt themselves through their choice of risky behavior. This argument is obviously ridiculous.

No American is arguing that a woman does not have a right to choose whether to have a baby or not. However, there are a plethora of choices available to reduce and eliminate the risk of pregnancy. Whether it be abstinence or contraception, a woman has plenty of choice. It is the existence of these choices that makes it ridiculous that a woman, not wishing to have a baby, would seek to end it’s life when it was her choice that brought it here.

The recent Roe v. Wade anniversary reminds me of a Spanish holiday, albeit by title only. “The Day of the Dead” is celebrated not only by the Spanish, but also by pro-choice Americans. While the Spanish holiday represents reverence for lost kin, the pro-choice holiday celebrates the freedom to end the existence of your child. But indeed, what a wonderful thing for those who fear the consequences of their own actions.

Nathan Borst is a senior in political science from Ames.