I was happy to see the write up on a friendly website here.
The political discourse provides this stark dichotomy that states that you are either "pro-life" or "pro-choice", but I’ve always wondered why those who are "pro-choice" are not also considered "pro-life."
I would imagine that there are very, very few people out there who support a woman’s right to choose and what’s in her best interest to do so because they are pro-death or in some way want to emotionally scar women.
Quite the contrary. Whereas many “pro-life” proponents merely seek to limit access to a full range of options for reproductive health, those who are “pro-choice” understand that abortions should be rare and a last resort and that we should eliminate the societal impetuses that forces women to have abortions—be that lack of education, inability to gain access to contraception, sexual assault and abuse; and that, furthermore, we should have a society with a social safety net that supports pregnant women and their would-be progeny. To my mind, that’s an authentic "pro-life" stance.
Props to Dr. Carhart for understanding that most people are "pro-life"—that if they intend to have children that they want the very best for them and for their family so that each human person finds herself able to live a full life, not one marred by lack of care, poor sanitation, shortage of food, and insufficient education. That’s not life. It’s existence, and to merely exist is not a life I would want for myself or for others.