No one takes abortion lightly
Maria Vitale has totally misrepresented the facts.
We need to recognize where the so called studies and conclusions reached come from that the PA Pro-Life Federation touts.
The Elliot Institute is a non-scientific right wing institution dedicated to the ultimate defeat of Roe v. Wade. The Institute states as one of their main goals; “the State interest in protecting potential human life”. They add, “a woman should never be the final decision maker in the area of abortion.” “The patient should be protected from her own ignorance.” So according to the Elliot Institute, all women are to be treated as children. The State knows best what they need. Sounds very Orwellian to me.
To comment on this letter, click on "Comments" below
The website, www.afterabortion.org was listed as giving further documentation. This is the Elliot Institute website; with their erroneous information, hidden agenda and scare tactics.
There is no real difference in agenda of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation and the Elliot Institute. Both are anti-choice and seek control of women’s lives, but the Elliot Institute masks that agenda.
Not all websites are to be trusted For factual, truthful information an objective source is needed. Be wary of those anti-choice groups masquerading as caring, informed sources with scientific knowledge. Those interested in factual, correct information on abortion and without a hidden political agenda; should check such trustworthy medical websites as, www.webmd.com, www.mayoclinic.com or www.medlineplus.gov.
These websites contain well researched, correct information without twisting facts. Abortion done properly and legally is one of the safest surgical procedures in the United States.
No one takes abortion lightly; it’s a tremendous and sad decision that should be made carefully by the woman not the State.
Sandra Gordon
Springettsbury Township
The question is not if abortion is taken lightly, but rather if it is right or wrong.
Abortion is always wrong.
Robert Ritchie
"Wrong" by whose religious or ethical standards, and how do we balance those standards against a woman's autonomy over her life and life wholly within her, and her differing standards?
Mr. Spangler - Please explain why a mother or father apparently doesn't have a "right" to eliminate the lives that are dwelling within the home where they reside. I mean, they pay the bills, make the sacrifices, etc. and yet it isn't legal to kill children that have already been born.
Really, what is the difference between a woman killing the life within her internal care and sphere of protection, compared to killing life in the protection of her external care?
Jeff, do you believe in absolutes?
Robert Ritchie
Yes, the anti-choice crowd is absolutely wrong.
To deny a woman the right to control her own body is nothing less than slavery.
Based on reality I believe the pro-death crowd is absolutely wrong... or if they prefer the term anti-life that would suit also.
Reality? A position based on religion is NOT based in reality, period. But it does appear to be pro-slavery, since it would deny women their Constitutional right to self-sovereignty.
I don't think anyone believes in absolutes. The president is pro-life because he thinks destroying innocent human life is wrong. (An absolute). Yet he started a war and, in war, innocent humans are killed. Calling it "collateral damage" does not change the fact. So, how absolute are any of our beliefs?
Lowell,
You say that "A position based on religion is NOT based in reality, period."
Are you absolutetly sure?
Robert
Lowell,
Do you really stand behind your statement that to "deny a woman the right to control her own body is nothing less than slavery?"
Applying that logic further, you reach some disturbing conclusions.
For example, if a woman has the "right" to murder her unborn child, she should also have the "right" to mutilate her body. Or, if she prefers, to kill herself, take drugs, poison, use herself as a suidice bomber ... all this is "control over her body."
To deny a woman these "rights" is nothing less than slavery.
Robert Ritchie
Oh, yes! Don't forgot the unborn women.
Yes, "absolutetly" sure. Look, a zygote is NOT a child. It's delusional to equate the two. It's delusional to equate abortion with suicide, self-mutilation or terrorism. In fact, it's just plain stupid, and an indication how far you have to reach to make your invalid point. It's all about punishing women for having sex and demanding control over their own lives.
Lowell,
Calling people stupid and delusional proves nothing, except your anger, perhaps.
Life exists from the moment of conception and you cannot kill that life simply becuase the child is still in the womb.
Everything in life has a purpose, an end. And we must use things according to their end. Sexuality is for the procreation and education of children within marriage.
The sin of abortion is the logical conclusion of other sins of immorality.
It's interesting to see how the pro-death crowd hates life -- they advocate the murder of the unborn child and the suicide of adults. In this, we see a hatred for the Author of Life -- God!
Robert Ritchie
It's interesting to see how the pro-slavery crowd hates women, advocating their slavery in the name of a non-existent "god".