Advertisement

Controversy Over Supreme Court's Abortion Decision

July 16, 1989

In reading the statement by Susan Neiburg Terkel ("Abortion Won't Stop," Op-Ed Page, July 4), "The only problem . . . is that liberty, justice, and freedom for all are unachievable if we are compelled to take into account the unborn," brought many questions to mind:

Is the fetus a human being? If not, what is it? A tadpole? A globule? Is there a certain point when the fetus becomes human? Are we not creatures of constant change? If this is true, then, when do we become "human?" Can we draw the line?

Is the right to privacy absolute? Is any right absolute? Doesn't the court have a compelling interest to protect the lives of the innocent? Is the fetus, then, a criminal? What is it guilty of? What statute says that being conceived in the uterus can be punished by the death penalty?

Isn't it funny how we demand that the government interfere in the case of child abuse, but that it must stay away when a pre-born child is about to be killed? Isn't it tragic? Why do so many rapists walk the streets while the products of their actions are killed in their place? Is this fair? Did the fetus commit the rape? Do two wrongs make a right? Is there a right kind of killing and a wrong kind of killing? Does the right kind of killing do kindness to the one being killed? Is abortion kind to a fetus? Is it thankful for being spared from a life of pain? Can you fight fire with fire?

Who dies more frequently in abortion, the fetus or the woman?

ANDREA C. BURMAN

Northridge

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|