« Continue Browsing

e-mail article Print     e-mail article E-mail

Gary Kubalak, Fargo, Published March 17 2014

Letter: It’s about much more than the woman’s body

In regard to “A women’s body should be hers to control” (Forum, March 12 ), I take issue with two of the statements.

First, the author Jamie Freden wrote, “I am pro-choice, which does not mean pro-abortion.” To you and everyone who uses this logic, I say pro-choice, by definition, means you support legalized abortion; pro-abortion, by definition, means you support legalized abortion; therefore you are pro-abortion. Why sugarcoat it with the label “pro-choice”? If you’re OK with abortion, stand up and say so.

Second, I have never understood the argument that a pregnant women’s body is solely her own and therefore abortion is her choice, her right. Thirty-eight states have fetal homicide laws that confer various penalties on someone willfully causing the death of an unborn child (except for legalized abortion). Science shows us that even the circulations of the mother and her unborn child never mix and their DNA, while similar, are each unique. I whole-heartedly agree that a woman should be able to do with her own body what she wants. However, a pregnant mother’s body is no longer solely her own. Now there are two bodies, two distinct human beings, two entangled but separate lives.

Science is clear on this; 38 states legally acknowledge this; why can’t the “pro-choice” crowd understand this? Abortion doesn’t affect only the mother’s own body, it dramatically affects the body of her unborn child as well. Why then should abortion be her right, solely her choice?