Unfettered Letters

Late-term abortion is child abuse

I find it ironic that in March a jury cleared, on all charges, George Tiller — the man who performed 250 to 300 late-term abortions in 2003. The next month, April, is “Child Abuse Prevention Month.”

What is wrong with our thinking when we deem a procedure that is heinously murderous to an innocent child all right and we turn around and fight child abuse with all our might (which we should)? Is that justice for all? I think not.

And for all those who cry “women’s rights,” what about the rights of all those little women (and men) whose lives are so easily snuffed out? I wonder what their “choice” would be if they could somehow make it known?

Linda Tavis
Kansas City, Kan.

Late-term abortion

Why aren’t people outraged that George Tiller performed “... 250 to 300 late-term abortions in 2003?” (3/28, A-1, “Tiller cleared on all charges”) Is it because either the American public does not know or does not want to think about what a late-term abortion procedure entails?

It is not a simple, quiet procedure like putting a sick pet to sleep.

I would like to see a news article explain the procedure of a late-term abortion so that the American public can see and contemplate the horrendous nature of the barbaric act. Once known, why would any human agree or participate in such an act?

I wonder what type of life-threatening condition has developed at the final stages of a pregnancy that a woman would pursue such a thing for her own child?

What a sad state our society has turned into, to allow such a heinous act against an innocent child. Even a sick pet is treated more humanely.

M.A. Warden
Olathe

Apathy toward abortion

Mary Sanchez (3/10, Opinion, "Abortion foes disrespect church-state separation") profoundly states "I agree with (Archbishop Joseph Naumann) that abortion is abhorrent and morally wrong." If she truly believes this, then the rest of the article makes no sense.

Abortion is morally wrong only if the fetus is a human person. Otherwise it is no different than a mole or gallbladder removal. If so, what's the fuss all about? And if the fetus is a person, then abortion stops the life of a person.

Shouldn't stopping a human life trump all other values? Sadly, in our society it does not. There are more important values and agendas such as the economy, the war and unemployment. This attitude of apathy toward the vulnerable translates into atrocities elsewhere. Articles supporting abortion, however disguised or rationalized, only further this agenda.

I watch what I do to see what I believe.

John Miller
Fairway

Family planning prevents abortions

Recently there have been references in the media, including The Star,  to the repeal by President Obama of the gag rule, i.e. lifting the restrictions on federal funding for certain international family planning groups. Some of these references have stated that those organizations “promote” abortion.

All of the last several Republican presidents have implemented the gag rule against any organization that even presents abortion as an option. There is ample evidence that ready access to family planning methods prevents abortions, and it is a pity that anti-choice folks cannot bring themselves to find common ground with pro-choice folks on that basis. It would benefit many if they would.

Susan Fischer
Leawood

Abortion isn’t always selfish

Anthony J. Tarantino Sr. (3/1, Letters) says abortion is selfish. I say the issue of abortion is not black and white.

Carrying an infant to term and giving birth is not without medical problems, especially for teens and pre-teens. You have your head in the sand if you think these tragic pregnancies don’t happen. We have sicko males among us who impregnate the females in their households. A recent Star article (1/24, A-1, “Father faces charges of incest and murder; Man allegedly had four children by a teenage daughter”) detailed one ugly story. No girl should be forced to have her own sibling.

By definition a parasite is a something that lives off something else. We don’t want to believe or even say the words, but in the case of a female and fetus, it is what it is.

And, men, I will listen attentively to your rant about abortion and pregnancy when it is your medical condition. Strong rhetoric about abortion by males suggests they may have a control-the-women issue.

Doris Duke
Overland Park

Choosing to have an abortion is hardly a selfish act. Most women choose to terminate a pregnancy out of concern about being able to properly care for and provide for a child. The rebuttal? “Women need to think about that before having sex.” The fact is that many women do think about that before having sex, but birth control methods fail.

And then, of course, there are women who are brutally raped. Is rape a selfish choice? Is it selfish for the raped woman to look at her child and be constantly reminded of the brutal rape? I think not.

What is selfish is to bring a child into this world fully knowing that you (the mother) are not capable of caring for that child.

Erin Cooper
Lenexa

Abortion is a selfish choice

There are truths that reach out to all of us when we consider the act of abortion. One truth is self-evident. An evolution in the womb will inevitably create a life. Abortion ends that process, regardless of your beliefs in the timing of a heartbeat or in the moment of conception.

The Freedom of Choice Act is a socially poised legislation to give women who do not want a baby permission to terminate the pregnancy “prior to fetal viability” for any reason, and prohibits interference with the mother’s choice. Who determines “fetal viability?”

The real issue of abortion lies within the reasons behind the choice. The reasons are self-serving without consideration for the respect of a life being created. Are we so omnipotent that we can choose to end a life? Doesn’t every being have the “right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?” Who are we to interfere with these basic human rights?

Whatever your beliefs, we acknowledge that there is a process in the womb that will eventually result in creation of a life. Interfering with that process, abortion, will end it. We, the people, do not have that right.

Anthony J. Tarantino Sr.
Overland Park

Kline deserves respect

The media’s perennial assault campaign against Phill Kline as he has dealt with the George Tiller abortion clinic is just an example of the tactics used to divert our attention from the real issue of abortion. We are a country that has legalized murder through a Supreme Court ruling and has further facilitated the slaughter of unborn children through the many laws passed to protect a woman’s “rights.”

Some of these lawmakers and Supreme Court judges who have ruled in favor of abortion have since died, and now they know who is the only author of moral law and our true judge.

If we really accepted God’s laws as the standards for those we enact, Kline would not be the whipping boy the media has made him. In fact, he would most likely get the respect he truly deserves. You see, he understands law as few in his profession do.

Ed Cronin
Shawnee

Private womb, public assistance

Wombs are private matters (2/13, Letters, “California octuplets”). But when the woman in charge of said womb continues to produce children without any means of support for them, she makes her private decision a public matter, regardless of how many babies are in that womb.

Californians will undoubtedly be caring for all 14 of Nadya Suleman’s children. Nevertheless, public money needs to continue to be spent to educate women and families about all of their options, because once children are here, they are ours. It takes a village …

Bernadine Kline
Liberty

California octuplets

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.

Kim Wetzel-Williams
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.

Susan Hidalgo
Lake Quivira

No middle ground on abortion

Sorry, Ellen Goodman, there will never be a middle ground on abortion (2/1, Opinion, “On abortion, common ground is still elusive”). On one side are those like yourself, who consider an innocent human life to be a disposable object. On the other side are those who consider the taking of innocent human life in the womb to be a despicable, barbaric and heinous act that will continue to shame our nation for as long as abortion endures.

I wonder if Ms. Goodman would seek a middle ground regarding slavery or genocide? Abortion is wrong, plainly and simply. Those who believe and hope that we are still one nation, under God, will respect and obey his commandments, particularly, “thou shalt not kill.”

Regarding the so-called “progressive” wing of the pro-life movement, ultimately they have chosen the pro-abortion position. For those who are not for God and his commandments are against God and his commandments.

Francis Slobodnik
Topeka