Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Not the support we need

In a case of strange bedfellows, a Christian conservative editorialist has called the NCAA's decision to prevent member schools from eliminating or reducing a pregnant athlete's aid money a score for women's rights.

Yeah, I thought so too but not for the reasons Thomas Ranson states. He's excited because it means fewer abortions. Female athletes win because they don't have to murder their innocent children or risk death and permanent damage by having an abortion. They can avoid, he writes, those blood clots that can afflict young women who get abortions.

Not exactly the reasons I was thinking when I heard the news. I was more excited by the fact that coaches and athletic departments and unversities had to start actually following the law that prevents them from not penalizing pregnant women. A victory for women's rights generally but also a small step in curbing some of the insanity that exists in big-time (and more and more, little-time) college athletics and dispelling the notion that student-athletes are the property of their institutions.

I agree with Ranson that universities should not be making their student-athletes choose between giving birth and getting aid money. Completely different rationale of course--that's what helps me sleep at night.

No comments: