Columnist Ellen Goodman opined that the birth of the Suleman octuplets “is more than an individual decision” (2/8, Opinion, “Case of octuplets shows lack of sense and limits”). Goodman implies that because public dollars may be needed to care for these children, the government should be entitled to regulate the implantation of embryos.
Goodman has previously established her belief that government should not interfere with women’s privacy “rights” to abortion. What twisted logic. If a woman’s womb is a private matter, then her decision to deliver a “litter” is private. On the other hand, if the concern is that tax dollars are going to be spent contrary to Americans’ wishes, then public money should not be used to pay for abortions.
If Goodman is truly concerned about how our tax dollars are being spent, she should be outraged at President Obama’s decision to lift the ban against using tax revenues to procure abortions around the globe. A Gallup poll reveals that only 35 percent of Americans approve of President Obama’s decision to lift that ban.
It is hypocrisy to play the “privacy” and “public money” cards when it suits only one side of a debate.
Kansas City, Kan.
Nadya Suleman chose to have in vitro fertilization and now has eight more children. I wonder if her unidentified fertility doctor is married. If not, maybe he should consider marrying Nadya to help care for these innocent children.
If he is not available, maybe she should consider adoption. That decision would demonstrate responsibility, maturity and love, which seems to be a huge deficit in this sad scenario.