SitNews - Stories in the News - Ketchikan, Alaska

Viewpoints: Letters / Opinions

Regarding Abortion...
By Lenard Nance


March 06, 2013
Wednesday PM

Freedom to choose what?

In the arena of discussion regarding abortion I have heard and read a phrase that, like a hub in a wheel, seems to anchor all arguments that revolve around it ... "freedom of choice". What I rarely hear or read is a definitive answer to my question, "freedom to choose what?".

Does it matter that, in this discussion, "freedom of choice" is not defined? And does it matter that not all choices are equally legitimate?

"Freedom of choice", or "free choice", or "prochoice" is something many of us would agree on when it comes to choosing not to condone actions that promote and result in abuse. How then does the discussion about abortion skip over that fact on the way to a decision to be "prochoice" with regards to taking the life of the unborn?

Freedom to choose what - is a question that does matter. It matters by what measure we choose. Legitimate choices are not always right just because they are legal.

Prochoice Issues

People who are prochoice about abortion are often not prochoice about other issues with less at stake.

I am glad that I quit smoking cigarettes because, not only was it hurting me, I was hurting my family. After some time of not smoking cigarettes, I discovered that my attitude had become less and less anti-choice about the issue of cigarette smoking in public places because cigarette smoke hurts other people.

Due to an auto accident, I have first hand experience regarding seat belt use being mandatory. I am anti-choice about the issue of wearing seat belts because seat belts use greatly reduces the chance of fatal injury.

I find that many people who claim to be prochoice about abortion laws also support laws requiring people to wear seat belts. They are anti-choice about seat belts because seat belts save lives. When the health of others are at stake, when lives are at stake, freedom to choose can and is legitimately restricted by society.

Right To Choose

Did you know that slaveowners in the U.S. a 170 years ago were prochoice? Their belief and attitude was, "It's our right", and "don't tell us we can't choose to own slaves". Those who wanted slavery to be illegal were accused of being anti-choice, anti-freedom, and imposing morality.

Did you know that the civil rights movement opposed the exercise of personal rights that much of society defended. The movement was anti-choice regarding racial discrimination.

The U.S. was a free country and whites historically had a free choice to own slaves and historically had free choice to discriminate. The civil rights movement fought to take away that free choice to own slaves and discriminate.

Did you know, almost all movements of oppression and exploitation - from slavery, to pornography, to drug dealing, to abortion - have labeled themselves as prochoice. Interestingly, opposing movements offering compassion and liberation have been labeled anti-choice by the exploiters.

The victim of abortion has no choice, and is societies glaring exception to all the grandiose language about the right to choose. Nearly all violations of human rights have been defended on the grounds to choose.


Did you know that the U.S. Constitution does not contain a right to privacy? That right is nowhere to be found in the U.S. Constitution. Nevertheless, in 1973 the Supreme Court declared the right to privacy as higher than an unborn childÕs right to live.

Amazingly, some claim that the very instrument that is dedicated to ensure justice and compassion for all people, somehow guarantees a ÒrightÓ to kill the unborn.

We recognize privacy is a right but society also recognizes that some rights are higher then others.

Does one person's right to privacy supersede another person's right to life? No, and privacy is never an absolute right, but is always governed by other rights. Planned Parenthood would have us believe that prochoice is about privacy of the bedroom. Not so. Abortion is about taking the life of an unborn child - not about sex. Prolife folk are not interested in what goes on in the bedroom - the issue isn't sex. The issue is whether the unborn deserves to live.

But then, abortion is ultimately a moral issue not a legal one. It will never be resolved satisfactorily for the unborn, apart from the Creator's opinion and sentiment on life.

Lenard Nance
Ketchikan, AK


Received March 05, 2013 - Published March 06, 2013





Viewpoints - Opinion Letters:

letter Webmail Your Opinion Letter to the Editor



Representations of fact and opinions in letters are solely those of the author.
The opinions of the author do not represent the opinions of Sitnews.


E-mail your letters & opinions to
Your full name, city and state are required for letter publication.

SitNews ©2013
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska