De-hu­man­iz­ing de­vel­op­ing child

The Guardian (Charlottetown) - - EDITORIAL -

Bravo to Cather­ine Mul­lally for her fair and bal­anced views re­cently pub­lished in your news­pa­per, for I do not wish to take part in the of­ten ran­cid de­bate over abor­tion. Nonethe­less, I must make a state­ment, one that I hope will not en­gen­der ill will in any­one's heart.

While of­ten valid con­cerns have arisen about the health of the mother (but not of the fa­ther's state of mind), I have failed to hear many speak of the rights of the child in the womb.

Surely the fate of the liv­ing hu­man in the womb de­serves our com­pas­sion also, does it not? And I use the word hu­man ad­vis­edly, for that liv­ing be­ing is not a bod­ily part, but a per­son at the first stage of life.

More­over, child­less cou­ples who would welcome a child do ex­ist - oth­er­wise they wouldn't search for one in other lands.

Or, has our en­tire so­ci­ety merely de-hu­man­ized the de­vel­op­ing in­fant as a mere fe­tus? How sad. How in­hu­man. How piti­ful! May God for­give those of us who lived.

And, is eu­thana­sia the next real pos­si­bil­ity? Colmán O'Hare, OP, PhD, Char­lot­te­town

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.