Replies

Here's the letter I sent to Mr. Mantle, (who did a great job):
I agree that first principles must be stressed. It's so easy to be positive because true happiness, health and success, as well as a stable society and government result from those same principles. We have no reason to be shy, apologetic, or to hesitate when confronted with strawmen and circular logic.

It is vital that the pro-life advocate repeat that this is about the inalienable rights of each and every human, especially the right to life, and that the only legitimate function of government is to protect those inalienable rights, using as little force as necessary. Quite often, because most people are law-abiding, the prospect of breaking the law and threat of punishment is enough force.

As someone who studied and practices human medicine, I know that the life killed in abortion is a human life. There is no doubt about what kind of life, only whether it's **human enough.**

As to the problems of a ban on elective abortions (those which are not done to actually save life): those problems were not as great as imagined when thousands lost the right to own slaves and were deprived of what they considered their "right to own property." Those slave owners understood -really, they knew the truth: the slaves were human and the act of usurping the life or freedom of a human being is not only wrong, but harmful for the aggressor because, in the long run, it weakens any protection to life, liberty that we all have. Unfortunately, we still hear about violations of the laws against slavery (kidnappers, involuntary prostitution, and those who prey on immigrants), but no one would argue that these infringements on inalienable rights should be legal!

There is no longer shame attached to having a child out of wedlock in this country. Ironically, the proponents of abortion as birth control - the blatant or subtle eugenicists - are more likely to shame a woman or girl for completing an unplanned pregnancy than the straw man of the puritanical, religious, pro-life advocate.

No one on the prolife side should tolerate the idea that we do not support the mother and the child after birth. The Crisis Pregnancy Centers, the shelters and homes for mothers and their children, are run by pro-life (usually religious) institutions. And don't forget that we, too, pay taxes - just like the abortion advocates that fund Medicaid, WIC, and Welfare.

In the long run, we do need to stress that each child should be wanted, and that having children outside of a loving marriage is less than optimal. There is no need to accept accusations that we are imposing our values on others: the facts support this idea. Besides, who would deny that what everyone wants is one, unconditional, trusting love relationship for life and that the best way to find that love and life is to be sexually faithful to your mate, even before marriage (or even meeting him or her)? Children do better in school and later in life when their parents have an intact marriage. Marriages are more likely to avoid divorce if the partners do not live together before the wedding. Faithfulness (not celibacy, and not only abstinence before marriage) and monogamy for life is healthier. Especially for women, whose risk for HPV infection - which is the cause of 99+% of cervical cancer and virtually all those annual pap smears (That's right: the pap smear is an STD!) - is directly related to the number of sexual partners her partners have had.

One way to reduce the perceived "need" for abortion is to teach our children how to understand that how they live will affect how well they live and that it is vital to recognize what they really want: True love, and the security of their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Beverly Nuckols