Pro-Choice Tag Sparks Reactions

The unwitting Kimber Jerrils, author of “ ‘Pro-Choice’ Sticker Creates an Unwitting Target” (Commentary, Sept. 29), seems to have stepped blindly onto the battlefield of today’s American moral issues, blithely assuming it is a tea party, with tea party rules of etiquette. Predictably, this resulted in wounds.

The wounds in Ms. Jerrils’ case were, fortunately, to nothing more than her feelings, so that she bitterly vows never to air her pro-choice feelings again in public. Wounded feelings are by no means trivial. But they are no greater than the wounded feelings suffered by pro-life supporters. And all wounded feelings are trivial compared to the genuinely mortal wounds suffered by millions of unborn children in the United States.

I am puzzled by Ms. Jerrils’ bitterness. What responses did she expect? She admits she holds a “pro-choice” position. Fair enough. She posted a bumper sticker to make this opinion known. Presumably, most of us don’t care about her opinions. Some do, and approve. Some do, and disagree. Some disagree, and voice their disagreement heatedly.

What bothers her is that at least two individuals did not agree with her estimate of the importance of this issue. They got worked up about it. They were, perish the thought, harsh to her. They were rude. That they would see it her way was her unwitting assumption.

Ms. Jerrils is no longer unwitting. She now knows that those siding with the right to life of millions like her niece Jocelyn will not agree to treat the issue as trivially as Ms. Jerrils does.

THE REV. KENNETH E. HUNTER, Newport Beach