Letters to the Editor

Pro-abortion logic twisted and wrong

Isn’t it laudable that Daniel Zamos in his recent letter (May 21, “Abortion has been good for us”) said, “I hope that all children entering our world daily should be as lucky as I, but the prospect isn’t promising.” Makes you wonder if he said this with a straight face given his prior lament that children fated to be born into circumstances similar to his are more likely to become criminals than upright, productive citizens and are, therefore, much better off being terminated rather than being born. His solicitousness for the newborn comes at the end of his discourse inferring all the many good things that have been bestowed upon us by legalized abortion, the last of which is the spurious correlation between the advent of abortion and a reduction in crime in the United States. Of course, it probably never occurred to him that the lower crime rate might be linked to the fact that we have the highest incarceration level in our history.

Having lost the argument that life does not start off as a “blob” that somehow magically morphs into a human being, having lost the argument that pregnancy is not a malady requiring radical surgery, having lost the argument that abortion is never harmful to the physical or mental health of the woman, pro-abortionists now want us to believe that abortion is of necessity to reduce the crime rate. Abortionists will twist their thinking into mental pretzels to rationalize the need for abortion while at the same time calling a pro-life stance reactionary. I wonder if it will ever dawn on Mr. Zamos that the reduced revenue in the government’s coffers might somehow be correlated to the termination, since 1973, of the 54 million unborn, who today, if they had been given the opportunity of life as he was, might very well have become coveted tax paying citizens. You would think that a forward, progressive thinker like Mr. Zamos would very easily make that link.

The writer lives in Little River.