In February 2010, Ryan wrote an opinion column for the Heritage Foundation that clearly states his views on abortion and personhood. In his column, Ryan said, “A government’s job is to guarantee the universal human rights of its citizens … The government cannot possess unlimited power.” Ryan goes on to say, “The government first needs to determine whose rights should be protected … The rights of any entity that qualifies as ‘human’ must be protected.”

Clearly, Ryan is referring to the unborn. Ryan is a staunch conservative who believes that life begins at conception. He simply wants to protect the countless unborn children who can’t protect themselves. But I have a hunch Ryan doesn’t know what he’s getting himself into.

Throughout his entire column, Ryan does not once mention the women who are carrying these unborn children.

What about their lives? What about their rights to choose? Well, Ryan clearly believes their rights don’t matter.

It seems to me that Ryan believes that “universal human rights” should only be available to a select group.

A good example of this is H.R. 358 or the “Protect Life Act,” which was passed by the House of Representatives last fall and fully supported by Ryan. This bill would allow doctors to “exercise their conscience” when treating pregnant women, making it legal for hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women with life-threatening conditions.

What was the name of this bill again? Whose lives are they protecting? And when did we decide that the (potential) life of an unborn child was more important than the life of the mother?

In his column, Ryan goes on to call pro-choice liberals “deeply pessimistic.” “They denigrate life and offer fear of the present and the future,” Ryan said. However, it is my belief that perhaps conservatives could stand to have some fear of the future.

With the world population quickly running beyond 6 billion, likely irreversible global climate change, war, poverty and everything else bad happening in this country and around the world, we as human beings might be a little better off if we were pessimistic, even fearful about the future.

However, Ryan clearly isn’t thinking about our futures. Ryan doesn’t seem to believe that global climate change exists, considering his lack of support for clean energy and climate change programs.

Ryan even went so far as to make light of the situation in a 2009 column for The Journal Times, where he claimed that “fighting global warming has been a tough sell in our communities, where much of the state is buried under snow.” Ryan clearly isn’t a man who knows very much about the causes and effects of global climate change, but I digress.

In his column on right to life and personhood, Ryan goes on to say: “Liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals and leads us to live with less. This includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices.”

However, Ryan seems to be ignoring a large class of human beings whose rights to make choices he would like to see taken away: women. Ryan makes a point of calling unborn fetuses “human beings,” but fails to recall that women, too, are human beings who deserve consideration and respect.

The government cannot continue to ignore women in the fight over abortion rights. Pretending problems – such as women and global warming — do not exist will not make them go away.

As long as women’s rights are continually undermined in this country, I will continue to fight, and I hope you will join me.

One positive step we can all take is to vote against Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan in November’s election.

Caron Creighton is a guest columnist at The State News and a professional writing senior. Reach her at creigh16@msu.edu.