Los Angeles Times

Abortion back-and-forth

-

Dedicated readers of the Los Angeles Times have probably noticed that the topic of abortion has occupied significan­t print real estate lately on the letters page (and taken up considerab­le digital bandwidth). Not surprising­ly, several dozen letters to the editor on abortion were sent to us this week, most of them opposed to new laws in Alabama and Georgia.

So why is the topic occupying this space, and on a day when other abortion letters are being published? It’s to point out that abortion is one of a few topics — like, say, gun control — where letters from readers tend to prompt a significan­t number of additional letters from readers. In other words, we get a lot of letters to the editor on abortion written in response to other letters on abortion.

— Paul Thornton, letters editor

One published letter suggested talking about why women get pregnant when they do not want to. Reader Greg Seyranian obliges:

A letter writer correctly notes that unwanted pregnancie­s are the real root of the abortion issue. He wonders how such pregnancie­s might be avoided.

We already know: free, readily available birth control and comprehens­ive sex education.

For good measure, we may want to throw in ironclad paternity laws that slap men with lifelong responsibi­lity for the pregnancie­s they create. That might make rooms full of men a little less likely to continue legislatin­g pregnancy as though it were strictly a woman’s problem.

Robert Scott of Los Angeles, discussing letters about boycotting Georgia, suggests better wording:

No wonder there is such a lack of agreement on what to do about abortion. Consider the terminolog­y.

If you’re not pro-life, you’re pro-death. If you’re not pro-choice, you’re procompuls­ion. Who wants either of those? Instead we should think about the real effects on all of us.

What do you think of unwanted children? Are they a problem? Yes, of course. What do you think of unwilling mothers? Are they a problem? Yes, of course. I don’t want us to have either.

Every decision on abortion should depend on the circumstan­ces in each case. I would call this “pro-society,” but that seems too abstract.

Just forget the terminolog­y and make a thoughtful decision.

Melanie Clark of La Cañada Flintridge responds to a letter that asserted every abortion ends a life:

It is emphatical­ly untrue that an abortion necessaril­y stops a beating heart.

When I was an Army officer stationed in Germany during the Reagan administra­tion, a soldier’s wife in my unit became pregnant but the fetus died in utero. Under the cruel regulation­s of the “pro-life” president, this soldier was denied an abortion at the American military hospital, where she was told her pregnancy had to be carried to term even though the fetus had died.

This poor woman was forced to go to a local German hospital where she received an abortion quickly and with compassion.

 ?? Alex Wong Getty Images. ?? BOTH SIDES of the abortion debate take part in a demonstrat­ion in Washington in 2018.
Alex Wong Getty Images. BOTH SIDES of the abortion debate take part in a demonstrat­ion in Washington in 2018.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States