Letters to the Editor: ‘Pro-life’? Texas shows abortion foes are really forced-birth advocates
To the editor: If there was ever a woman who met the medical requirements for an exception to harsh abortion bans already passed in many Republican-led states and being proposed elsewhere, it was Kate Cox, pregnant with a fetus almost certain to die.
Unfortunately, she had to leave Texas to get the medically necessary care she needed to preserve her fertility and possibly save her own life.
The Texas Supreme Court decision to deny her an abortion — despite the need for a decision having been rendered moot by Cox’s leaving Texas to get care — and state Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton’s threat to the hospital where the abortion might have been performed show that “abortion foes” or “antiabortion advocates” are the wrong terms.
“Pro-life” isn’t accurate either, because Cox’s life appears valued much less than that of a doomed fetus.
A more accurate term for those opposing abortion is “forced-birth advocates.” The Times and all media should change their terminology.
Daniel Fink, M.D., Beverly Hills
..
To the editor: There are three issues with the abortion debate that make me wonder why it is a debate at all.
- Bodily autonomy. Even after death you have the right over what happens to your body, with the exceptions of mental incompetence or government-sanctioned execution. Even after death your organs cannot be donated without your previous, well-documented consent. How is it possible for law to override this right for living people?
- Religious freedom is guaranteed by the 1st Amendment, yet most antiabortion arguments make wild assumptions about the origin of a person’s soul (which is not a legal concept), often disguised as the start of life. But there isn’t universal agreement among religions or scientists when that occurs.
- Practicing medicine without a license is illegal in every state. Lawmakers, attorneys general and judges are all making life-altering and often life-threatening medical decisions for people even though they are not licensed medical providers. How is this legal?
Jennifer Booker, Waipahu, Hawaii
..
To the editor: Paxton and the unanimous Republican Supreme Court in Texas have cast a chilling, dystopian spin on the old song that says, “The Eyes of Texas are upon you.”
Sadly, politics aside, the actual reason they find Cox’s plight insufficient to “meet the exception” for a legal abortion in their state is both clear and self-evident.
Cox is still alive.
Reeve Rickard, Burbank
