Login | Member Center | Contact Us | Site Map | Archives | Alerts | Subscribe to the paper

HomeBlogsLettersToTheEditor

« War’s horrors unreported |  Main  | Conservative crowd polite »

April 30, 2007

Abortion ban vs. mandate

Re: Claudia Satori’s April 21 letter, “Protecting the preborn”:

Ms. Satori wrote a letter disagreeing with an article written by Ellen Goodman that was pro-choice. Ms. Satori was anti-choice, and her interest was for the “preborn.”

An omelet is “preborn,” and so is caviar. There are no “yet-to-be-born” dogs at the American Kennel Club dog show and no “eventually-to-be-borns” running at the Kentucky Derby.

However, prior-born children deserve that best healthcare. Previously-born children deserve accurate sex education so that abortions are not deemed necessary. Already-born children deserve love and understanding. Up-to-now-born children deserve safe places to live. And, heretofore-born women deserve respect for the decisions they make for their own lives.

Neither the Congress, nor the Senate, nor the Supreme Court belongs in a gynecologist's office.

The biggest decision is: Who will decide. Remember, whatever entity has the right to say a woman cannot have an abortion has the right to say a woman must have an abortion. Adolf Hitler forbade German women from having abortions, but Jewish and Gypsy women had to have them. It's two sides of the same coin.

— Miriam Albert, Thousand Oaks


Comments

Post a comment






Remember personal info?






Sponsored Links