Morning-After Pill and Politics
Re the Art of soft sell: Yes, I refer to Art Caplan, author of “What Women Don’t Know,” a Perspective on Abortion (Commentary, June 14).
As Caplan is the director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, I thought I was in for a more substantive, meaty debate, and not the flimsy, one-sided blankola he has presented.
No mention of RU-486, or the “abortion pill,” but only “the morning-after pill,” and “emergency contraception”? Have the previous two terms already accrued such negative baggage that the proponents of this blatant final solution for population control have tossed them out with the bathwater? It does seem so.
Caplan’s sophomoric argument about not feeling the need to change public policy to prevent the “literally hundreds of thousands of fertilized eggs that fail to come to term every year right now” advertises his awareness of the futility of his position, and its tenuous basis.
Outside of the laboratory, Art, we still adhere to the laws that our ancestors wisely put down in writing for us; and I think that even you might agree that attaining liberty and the pursuit of happiness is rather moot when one is denied the right to life.
G. FRED LOGAN
Laguna Niguel
* After reading Caplan’s excellent article on the morning-after pill and the influence of “abortion politics” on our country, I took a deeper look at myself. Living among family and social circles who adamantly oppose abortion, my voice on the issue has been minimalized over the years. But there comes a time when the greater good needs its voice heard louder than the trivia of personal harmony. Having given this issue detailed thought, I cannot imagine how “abortion politics” can wreak such irrational havoc on this downhill-headed society by scaring people like myself into refusing to speak out about their support of “personal choice politics.”
Anyone who read Caplan’s article and also read the feature article in the same day’s World Report about the growing separation between rich and poor societies is at the very least challenged to examine our need for appropriate women’s choice laws in this country.
The quiet among us must begin to face the necessary realities of our greater responsibility to society.
GREGORY L. FOOTE
Corona
* Regarding the “moment of conception” argument that the Catholic Church has historically held in defining life: With all due respect to the church hierarchy and my fellow Catholics, this argument falls into the “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” genre. In other words, the vast majority of Americans do not care what the Catholic Church’s position is, as they recognize other, and just as sincere, determinations as the first indication of life. Besides, all the blockaded clinics and attempts to criminalize RU-486 only reinforce the notion that the church is attempting to force non-members to swallow its doctrine, which in this instance is based solely on “faith.”
JIM HARRIGAN
Manhattan Beach