Resolutions by a city council can be used to express council policy, direct administrative or legal action, or make a public statement. On March 3, the Nogales City Council was close to debating a resolution that would have declared the city a safe haven for the unborn and offered support for legislation that restricts abortion rights.

We don’t have to imagine what life will be like for women if things like the Nogales anti-abortion resolution come to fruition. We don’t have to imagine because we have lived it in this country and we can see it now happening in others. Take our neighboring country of Mexico. Women are imprisoned without fault for miscarrying. Yes, it can happen here. And how would your wife or daughter prove that she misstepped when she fell and lost her child?

Whether by resolution, law or some other method, this issue is filled to the brim with imminent unintended consequences. For example, one could argue that an “unborn sanctuary city” protects the fetus of an undocumented woman. How would that work out? Would the fetus have to be legally protected on our land with prenatal care for the nine months? Then thrown back over the fence when it’s born?

I wish we lived in a perfect world where we wouldn’t need for this part of women’s health care, but we do not. It is never cut and dry; anguish exists behind the choice and the decision is certainly never taken lightly.

There are just too many unanswered questions and Nogales is not ready to make personal decisions of this size. Not when we can’t even make a decision on what to do with our property (i.e. the former Chase Bank building).

Councilman Marcelino Varona, Jr. said he might bring the resolution back for the council’s April 1 meeting. I say to the City of Nogales, drop this. Rip the resolution into tiny confetti pieces before April 1. It is not your place.

Francis Glad


Load comments