Abortion as Litmus Test

Re “Abortion Is the True Test of Conservatism,” Column Right, Jan. 28:

Now it can be told: I am the mysterious individual to whom David Klinghoffer refers only as “the PACman.” I am the founder and chairman of the Young Jewish Leadership PAC. Our objective is to provide a vehicle for conservative Jews to become more active in Republican politics. I called Klinghoffer, a staff member at National Review magazine, to ask his help in obtaining coverage for our group. I was quite surprised to learn that, without ever advising me of his intention to publish (much less distort) our conversation, he did precisely that.

Klinghoffer writes that a typical “trick of liberal Republican pols, seeking to woo naive conservatives” is to call themselves conservative and focus on economics. Seeking to expose this conspiracy, he asked me if the PAC had a view on abortion. I responded that the PAC has no position on abortion since it is not relevant to our objectives. As for myself, I added that I am pro-choice although others in the organization are pro-life. It is on this that Klinghoffer bases his assertion that neither I nor the PAC are legitimate conservatives.

Klinghoffer is a “naive conservative” if he believes that abortion is the true test of conservatism. His wish to exclude libertarians, pro-choicers (religious and nonreligious alike) and many others from the conservative movement is ill-advised and counterproductive. In case Klinghoffer hadn’t noticed, the Republicans are trying to reduce government’s role in people’s lives, not expand it. In any event, it was certainly a new experience for me to be called “a liberal.”

HOWARD HOROWITZ

New York

I strongly object to the headline, subhead and conclusions of Klinghoffer’s column. I particularly object to the notion that “the only convincing arguments against abortion are religious.” If one believes (as I do), that abortion is murder and denies the unborn his/her civil rights, then strong religious and/or nonreligious arguments can be made.

Therefore, the subject of abortion may be a religious, a moral and/or a personal decision, and may be considered under any of those headings, all of those headings or none of them.

We live in a peculiar society which, on one hand, rushes Siamese twins to hospital, at great expense, and with widespread concern, but, on the other hand, allows--and pays for--the deaths of thousands of babies every day.

WILLIAM R. HUGGINS

Fullerton

Klinghoffer sets up an incredibly tortuous linkage between his anti-abortion views and the Pledge of Allegiance, specifically citing the phrase “under God.” Apparently he doesn’t know or remember that “under God” was not in the original pledge. Rather, it was inserted during the period of the Eisenhower presidency, in the shadow of the McCarthy era.

DOROTHY KELLNER

Los Angeles