« Story Update: Eminent Domain Hoax | Main | Unhinged College Professor »
January 28, 2006
Newspaper Reader Clarifies Abortion Issue
Sometimes a letter to a local newspaper is worthy of being read by a national audience. I believe that the following letter to the Tulsa World is one such letter. The letter's author is responding to an editorial published by the Tulsa World.
Here is the letter in its entirety:
In "Roe at 33: New strategies" (Jan. 22), Tulsa World editorial writer Janet Pearson discussed women being "forced to carry a pregnancy to term," as if they were victims of chance. Almost anyone old enough to get pregnant knows how pregnancy occurs and how to prevent it.
While access to abortion may be limited, access to preventive measures is not. Any woman can obtain birth control free or at low cost through insurance or public health organizations. For unmarried women, abstinence has a 100 percent success rate. Adoption services are also available.
Pregnancy does not make a woman a victim. It is the outcome of an activity, which, in most cases, a woman willingly participated in without taking precautions. Why should an expectant mother be entitled to snuff out the life of her unborn child just because its existence is inconvenient, especially when she had the means to prevent the pregnancy in the first place?
Ms. Pearson believes teens should be entitled to abortion without parental consent. Yet teens need parental consent for other procedures. Telling a parent of a pregnancy is difficult, but why should parents be kept in the dark while society coddles their teens by enabling them to take a perceived easy way out?
Ms. Pearson made abortion sound like the only option for many women while ignoring the dangers, which are numerous. Overturning Roe v. Wade, or even doing away with abortion, would not take choice away from women. Women can choose morality and self control over what feels good for a moment, and if that is too difficult, they can choose to use birth control or give their babies up for adoption. There are plenty of choices available to women besides abortion.
Candace Marra, Mounds
Side Notes:
1)Many readers of the Tulsa World are unaware of the fact that the publisher's mother (and wife of the former publisher) used to serve on the board of directors of Planned Parenthood of Arkansas & Eastern Oklahoma. It would be reasonable to suspect that the newspaper might be biased when it comes to the issue of abortion.
2) The Tulsa World might object to me posting the aforementioned letter in its entirety. However, the letter's author doesn't write for the Tulsa World, and she is the one who possesses all rights to the letter's contents. I suspect that she would welcome her letter being shared with a national audience.
Posted by Dodo David at January 28, 2006 12:29 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/2108
Comments
That was a really well written letter regarding the state of abortion.
All science has done is both show that there is distinct life in the womb and to provide even more practical methods of birth control (like a patch).
She did not caveat for victims of rape and incest. I am still torn on that.
Posted by: aaron at January 29, 2006 04:19 PM
Thank you for sharing my letter. I certainly do welcome it being shared with a national audience. There was much more that I wanted to say, but I didn't want a liberal paper editing my letter. Anyway, I have submitted another letter to the Tulsa World, which should be published sometime in the next week. Please feel free to publish any of my letters anytime.
I would also like to address the rape and incest issue, mentioned by Aaron. First and foremost, I want to say that most women seeking abortions are not pregnant as a result of rape or incest. Rape only rarely results in pregnancy.
I am, I suppose, a diehard when it comes to right-to-life issues, because I do not believe in abortion in any circumstance, including rape and incest. This is a tough issue, because women pregnant in these circumstances have already suffered a great deal of trauma. However, I see two assumptions being made that need to be done away with. First, there is the assumption that pregnancy and childbirth are traumatic, and will therefore add to the trauma. Second, is the assumption that abortion is not traumatic.
I'll start with the first assumption. Pregnancy and childbirth are natural processes. While they do involve difficulty, they are not traumatic, unless, of course, there are severe complications.
As for the second assumption, abortion is extremely unnatural and traumatic. I have read stories by women who had been raped and chose to abort the baby, and many said that the abortion was at least as traumatic as the rape itself. There are many studies out there that show that abortion is linked with an increased risk of depression. Many women also experience post-traumatic stress disorder in the afermath of abortion, and additionally, abortion increases a woman's risk of getting breast cancer. Nine months of pregnancy and a birthing process are small potatoes compared with the the potential lifelong traumatic effects resulting from abortion.
The bigger issue, however, is the issue of life and justice. Rape and incest are unjust situations. That a woman also has to endure a pregnancy is also unjust. However, the injustice is only going to increase if the life of that unborn child is snuffed out also. Remember, the child cannot help the fact that he/she is the product of rape/incest. Neither of these factors takes away from the child's humanity.
The issues of rape and incest and abortions are delicate and difficult issues, and I would not fault anyone for disagreeing with me on this issue. I do hope, though, that as you consider your stance on this issue, that you will consider some of these thoughts.
Thanks for reading, and again, thank you for recognizing my letter. I truly feel honored.
Posted by: Candace Marra at March 1, 2006 01:27 PM