The Pro Choices Movement

The Pro Choices and Lives Movement
A progressive movement to protect a woman's right to choose life

Videos

Karissa and Billy Fretwell were killed by Billy's father in 2019, because she chose to continue her pregnancy with Billy in 2015.
The Maternal Rights Act would protect an unwed mother and child from a criminal-minded father.

Why the Law of 1 Choice is Dangerous to Pregnant Women
In the US, misdemeanors are penalized with a fine and felonies are penalized with imprisonment. If a man impregnates a woman that he is not married to, then he has caused an unwanted pregnancy; and this is essentially a misdemeanor, because he is to be penalized with a fine. The fine might be called "child support," but it is a fine nonetheless; because it is a sum of money exacted as a penalty by a court of law (the very definition of a fine). If the man fails to pay the fine for causing an unwanted pregnancy, then he commits a felony, because failure to pay child support is punishable by imprisonment.

Ever since the Roe vs. Wade decision in 1973, we have been living under a law, which we call the Law of 1 Choice (L1C); because it does not separate an unwed couple's choice into two independent choices, as perhaps a law should. In addition to that, those of us who have been supporting the L1C refer to ourselves as pro choice. However, the L1C puts the unwed pregnant woman in danger; because it makes her the judge, deciding whether the man will have to pay the fine (child support) for his misdemeanor offense (causing an unwanted pregnancy). Her choice is between either continuing or terminating the unwanted pregnancy.

MAKING A WOMAN JUDGE A MAN

To CONTINUE an unwanted pregnancy is to CONVICT him of causing it.

To TERMINATE an unwanted pregnancy is to ACQUIT him of causing it.

If she makes the choice of continuing the pregnancy, then she is essentially convicting him (declaring him guilty of causing an unwanted pregnancy); because he will have to pay the fine (child support). If she makes the choice of terminating the pregnancy, then she is essentially acquitting him (declaring him innocent of causing an unwanted pregnancy); because he will have to pay no fine at all (no child support at all).

If the man is not able and willing to pay the fine for causing an unwanted pregnancy, then he is likely to ask, beg, or even threaten the woman to make the choice of terminating the pregnancy (acquitting him), so that he will not have to pay the fine. In fact, the leading cause of death among unwed pregnant women, is to be killed for making the choice of continuing the pregnancy (convicting him); and as we saw in 2019 with Karissa and Billy Fretwell of Oregon, this potential for double homicide does not go away after the child is born. To protect the maternal life, we will have to stop making the woman judge the man, and start letting a judge judge the man.

The History of the Law of 1 Choice (L1C)
Before the Roe vs. Wade decision in 1973, we lived under a law, which we call the Law of 1 Life (L1L), because it protected the fetal life from abortion, without protecting the maternal life from homicide or botched abortion. In addition to that, supporters of the L1L refer to themselves as pro life. Before 1973, pro life was a stance and pro choice was a movement (towards the future). But since 1973, pro life has been a movement (towards the past) and pro choice has been a stance. This is why our NARAL acronym had to be changed in 1973, from "National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws" to "National Abortion Rights Action League."

Figure 1 - The L1C replaces the L1L in 1973

In 1973, the L1L was replaced with the L1C, which we have lived under ever since (see Figure 1). But, even though the L1C protects pregnant women, who want to get an abortion, from botched abortion, it fails to protect pregnant women, who don't want to get an abortion, from homicide. We know this, because the leading cause of death, among unwed pregnant women, is to be killed for not getting an abortion.

How the L1C Can be Changed to Protect the Maternal Life from Danger
In order to protect the unwed pregnant woman from danger, two things must be done. First, the man, who is not able and willing to pay the fine (child support) for his misdemeanor offense (causing an unwanted pregnancy), must be given a chance to make a plea bargain with the state in order to avoid imprisonment (for failing to pay child support). He would make the plea bargain by giving the state near 100% assurance (99.85% to be exact) that he will not commit the offense again. He would give that assurance to the state by getting a vasectomy. He can bank sperm before the outpatient procedure, so that he is still able to have children in the future.

The state should be happy to accept the plea bargain, because it is much cheaper than housing a prisoner. The man would no longer be required to pay the full amount of child support, only a partial amount, if any. The public would pay the difference between the two amounts to the mother; and because no man would be putting more than one child on public assistance, the Public Assistance Fund would be sustainable.

However, the man may not even want to pay the partial amount of child support. If so, he could ask, beg, or even threaten the woman to choose to terminate the pregnancy, so that he will not have to pay any amount of child support. Therefore, the second thing that must be done to protect the unwed pregnant woman from danger is to separate their choice into two independent choices, his and hers. In other words,

SEPARATE...

THEIR CHOICE

EITHER she continues the unwanted pregnancy and he pays for causing it

OR she terminates the unwanted pregnancy and he does not pay for causing it

INTO...

HER CHOICE

EITHER she continues the unwanted pregnancy and begins to receive compensation upon giving birth

OR she terminates the unwanted pregnancy and receives no compensation

AND...

HIS CHOICE

EITHER he pays for causing an unwanted pregnancy by fine

OR he pays for causing an unwanted pregnancy by plea bargain.

The two choices are independent, because her choice has no bearing on his, and his choice has no bearing on hers. In the rare case where she chooses to terminate the unwanted pregnancy even though he is choosing to pay the full amount of child support, his payments would go towards public assistance for children of deadbeat fathers. This is the Law of 2 Choices, or L2C. The bill, which (if passed into law) would produce the L2C, is called the Maternal Rights Act (MRA); because it would protect the maternal life from the danger of homicide (see Figure 2).

Figure 2 - The L1C can be replaced with the L2C

Those of us who are pro choice should support the MRA/L2C, because the unwed pregnant woman would have true freedom of choice. True freedom of choice is to be free from being pressured into choosing one way or the other (ie. to terminate or to continue an unwanted pregnancy). But the people who are pro life should also support the MRA/L2C, because of the side effect that would come with passing the MRA into law. The side effect is that it would reduce the demand for abortion, by giving the unwed pregnant woman a financial incentive to continue the unwanted pregnancy. In other words, the MRA/L2C would keep abortion safe and legal, while making it rare. The words "safe, legal, and rare" turn out to be prophetic! If you are pro life and you think the MRA/L2C might make abortion rare enough for us to consider a fetal rights addendum, or FRA, at a future time, then please click this link: addendum.

How the MRA/L2C Can Unite a Divided Nation
If pro choice people hear about the MRA, and they come to support it, then they become pro choices; because they support the Law of 2 Choices (maternal and paternal). The pro choices position can also be called the "pro choice ÷ 2" position, making those who hold it pro choice dividers, since they are in favor of dividing the choice in two. That's the formula for ending the murder of pregnant women.

The Formula for Ending the Murder of Pregnant Women
CHOICE ÷ 2 = THE END OF THE MURDER OF PREGNANT WOMEN
Choice (parental) divided by two (maternal & paternal) equals the end of the murder of pregnant women.

If pro life people hear about the MRA, and upon seeing that it would make abortion rare, they come to support the MRA, then they become pro lives; because they support protecting both lives, the maternal life now (via the MRA) and the fetal life later (via the FRA). The pro lives position can also be called the "pro choice ÷ 2 + life" position, making those who hold it pro-life choice-dividers (the adjective "pro-life" modifying the noun "choice-divider").

The two existing groups of people (pro choicers and pro lifers) are badly divided against each other. But the two new groups of people (pro choice dividers and pro-life choice-dividers) will be UNITED, because both will be in favor of dividing the choice in two. They will work TOGETHER to raise awareness for the MRA, so that it can be passed into law. This is why we say, "Make America united again," or "unity through division" (since we would be united behind the idea of dividing the choice). Weather tragedies bring people together, and in our case, the tragedy of pregnant female murder would be bringing us together.

Once the MRA is passed into law, we will see how rare it makes abortion; and depending on how rare it makes it, we might be be able to consider the fetal rights addendum at that time. Since the MRA would protect the maternal life from homicide at the hand of the father, it is proposed by law-abiding men and supported by all women. Since the addendum would protect the fetal life from an unnecessary abortion at the hand of the mother, it would be proposed, at a future time, by law-abiding women and supported by all men. All men would support the addendum; because under the MRA, men would no longer stand to benefit financially off of a woman choosing to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.

How We Will End the Murder of Pregnant Women
For now, the focus of those who hold the two new positions (pro choices and pro lives), will be on what it will take to pass the MRA into law, and the following is what it will take:

1. Let's raise awareness for the MRA. (see 'Sign the Petition' in the top menu)
2. Let's generate public support for the MRA. (share the petition on Facebook)
3. Let's contact the pro choice legislators, asking them to support the MRA (see 'Letter to Legislator' in the top menu).
4. Let's not vote unless we have tried to contact the pro choice candidates, asking them to support the MRA. They won't respond if only a few of us try to contact them, but if enough of us try, they will respond.

The reason why we need to direct our attention to the pro choice legislators (rather than their counterparts) is because the Law of 1 Choice is the status quo. Also, the pro life legislators will not have anything to gain by responding to our progressive bill proposal (the MRA) until the pro choice legislators have responded. In countries where the Law of 1 Life is still the status quo, we would need to direct our attention to the pro life legislators, encouraging them to consider adding the MRA to an existing fetal rights law (see dashed arrows in Figure 3).

Figure 3 - If the FRA were added later, it would make the L2C (MRA) the L2L (MRA + FRA)
(Dashed arrows show the backwards path of passing the FRA before the MRA)

How Planned Parenthood would operate, once the Maternal Rights Act (MRA) is passed into law
Under the Law of 2 Choices (the law enacted by the Maternal Rights Act), every unwanted pregnancy would need to be registered with the state before the choice is made between either continuing or terminating the pregnancy. For the safety of women, it is VERY IMPORTANT that planned parenthood (PP), or a school nurse, finds out that she is pregnant BEFORE the man who impregnated her finds out. Otherwise, the man might try to take her to a place that does abortions illegally, in order to cover up the crime of causing an unwanted pregnancy (or worse yet, the crime of rape or sex trafficking). The primary purpose for the MRA is to protect unwed pregnant women from the danger of either being threatened to get an abortion or being killed for not getting one; but it is difficult for the MRA to fulfill that purpose if the man finds out that she is pregnant before PP finds out. The following is how PP would work under the MRA:

1. The unwed woman (or abused wife), who fears that she could be pregnant, goes to PP (planned parenthood), or a school nurse, for a pregnancy test.

2. If the test is positive, then the pregnancy is immediately registered with the state as an unwanted pregnancy. The state will need the name of the alleged father (or names of possible fathers if the father is unknown), name of mother, her due date, and her income. (The remaining steps are not applicable to the case of an abused wife - see MRA for those steps).

3. The state will use the information to determine how much child support the woman will receive if she gives birth. The state will tell her the amount, and bill the alleged father for that same amount separately (in the case of rape, the alleged father would be arrested).

4. On her due date, one of 4 things will be due from the alleged father to the state, regardless of whether or not she gets an abortion:

A. A full child support payment(if she has gotten an abortion, this payment would go towards a public assistance fund for children of deadbeat fathers, and his payments will continue for the number of years, between 1 and 18, that has been predetermined by state law),

B. A partial child support payment (if required) accompanied by a note from his doctor certifying that he has gotten a vasectomy (the doctor should recommend that he bank some sperm before the procedure), or

C. A marriage certificate, certifying that he has married the mother.

D. A death certificate, certifying that his unborn child died of natural causes.

5. The woman makes her choice:

A. She could choose to continue the pregnancy, knowing that she will start receiving compensation upon giving birth, for the amount of child support calculated by the state.

B. She could choose to terminate the pregnancy, receiving no compensation, as long as she takes a NIPP test (NIPP = non-invasive pregnancy test). The NIPP test is needed in case the alleged father denies being the father.

NOTE: Under the Law of 2 Choices, the demand for abortions will decrease and the demand for vasectomies will increase. It would therefore be recommended that planned parenthood change its business model to handle these changes in demand.

Figure 4 - The abortion issue is not a dichotomy but a tetrachotomy

If you have questions, comments, or suggestions about the MRA or FRA, please send an email to ProChoices@outlook.com. The idea for the MRA and FRA came to the Eternal Gospel Society (www.EternalGospelSociety.com) while they were doing two things, asking their God in prayer for the abortion-ending law and believing that they would receive it. They ask that you please do not give credit (or blame), for the MRA and FRA, to any of them or to their group. Instead, please give credit (or blame) to whoever or whatever you think created us male and female, that is, to "nature's God" as our Declaration of Independence calls him, her, them, or it.

1.	Let's raise awareness for the MRA. (see 'Sign the Petition' in the top menu)
2.	Let's generate public support for the MRA. (share the petition on Facebook)
3.	*Let's contact the pro choice* legislators**, asking them to support the MRA (see 'Letter to Legislator' in the top menu).
4.	*Let's not vote unless we have tried to contact the pro choice* candidates**, asking them to support the MRA. They won't respond if only a few of us try to contact them, but if enough of us try, they will respond.

1.	The unwed woman (or abused wife), who fears that she could be pregnant, goes to PP (planned parenthood), or a school nurse, for a pregnancy test.
2.	If the test is positive, then the pregnancy is immediately registered with the state as an unwanted pregnancy. The state will need the name of the alleged father (or names of possible fathers if the father is unknown), name of mother, her due date, and her income. (The remaining steps are not applicable to the case of an abused wife - see MRA for those steps).
3.	The state will use the information to determine how much child support the woman will receive if she gives birth. The state will tell her the amount, and bill the alleged father for that same amount separately (in the case of rape, the alleged father would be arrested).
4.	On her due date, one of 4 things will be due from the alleged father to the state, regardless of whether or not she gets an abortion:
	A.	A full child support payment(if she has gotten an abortion, this payment would go towards a public assistance fund for children of deadbeat fathers, and his payments will continue for the number of years, between 1 and 18, that has been predetermined by state law),
	B.	A partial child support payment (if required) accompanied by a note from his doctor certifying that he has gotten a vasectomy (the doctor should recommend that he bank some sperm before the procedure), or
	C.	A marriage certificate, certifying that he has married the mother.
	D.	A death certificate, certifying that his unborn child died of natural causes.
5.	The woman makes her choice:
	A.	She could choose to continue the pregnancy, knowing that she will start receiving compensation upon giving birth, for the amount of child support calculated by the state.
	B.	She could choose to terminate the pregnancy, receiving no compensation, as long as she takes a NIPP test (NIPP = non-invasive pregnancy test). The NIPP test is needed in case the alleged father denies being the father.
NOTE: Under the Law of 2 Choices, the demand for abortions will decrease and the demand for vasectomies will increase. It would therefore be recommended that planned parenthood change its business model to handle these changes in demand.