Abortion is a red herring

After much time and effort exerted in frustration over the general misconceptions about feminism, I have decided to write a reader-friendly article. There are so many people that I love and respect, people whom i consider to be educated, knowledgeable and intelligent, who i believe are relatively unaware of feminism, it's goals and it's causes. And, even, it's varying definitions and ideologies. In order to agree or disagree it is necessary to be informed about the nature of the beast. In discussing it all with Wes yesterday I have decided this is not only necessary, but to not do so is dangerously apathetic.

Now, instead of beginnning with feminism as a whole, I have decided to delve into an area of much dead-horse beating. In an attempt to, once again, dispel the misconceptions and misinformation that I believe runs rampant in these topics.
My article is entitled (informally) "Abortion is the smelliest of red herrings"

Here I am going to give a brief sneak peek into my thoughts....

With all the turmoil at present in the US concerning the supreme court nominations, it is not only ignorant, but dangerous for us to be uninformed (at the least, let alone actively protesting).
To believe that the results in the US are not going to change things here in Canada is simply naive. The organizations pushing for the repeal of abortion laws in the US are inseperably tied to thier sister organizations in Canada. Therefor, it is as important to be informed about what is going on there as here. On that note, however, I wonder how many of you (us) are informed about the laws concerning abortion in Canada. I bet it's not as accessible and available as you think. Several provinces have zero access to abortion. Several provinces refuse to cover it under Ohip, stating that it is an elective(while Ohip has no qualms about covering gastric bypass!!).

My main topic of coversation in the article, however, is not morality of abortion. That is the red herring. Instead it is the following:

To believe that one would not be adversely affected by anti-choice legislation is uninformed, short-sighted and dangerously apathetic.
I will argue the whole picture of anti-choice history and current affects. It is much more broad than you could possibly argue would specifically be removable from any person's given life.

The right to abortion is a by-product of privacy protection laws. To repeal abortion is to repeal the rights to privacy doctrines. To do so is to relinquish rights of living in any way that is not cohesive to the moral majority. Are you prepared to do that? Can you support that with the idea that you are not going to ever have an abortion and are therefor, unnaffected by accompanying legislation?

Before you argue for or against anything I have said, remember that this is a sneak peek into my full argument. And if you know me, you know that I appreciate a good debate with real arguments. So, after reading my article, if you are prepared to back up what you have to say. then i am happy to listen to any rebuttles that head my way.