TO THE EDITOR:
I am writing in response to Jordan Stone's letter, "Federal funding of abortion itself is an example of imposing particular views."
I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed in Emily Batchelder's column to which Stone was responding, but Stone does make some important points. I think it is important to point out the apparent inability of both sides to recognize the other's argument.
Although pro-choice myself, I am not pro-abortion. The problem is that you shouldn't oppose abortion without a viable plan to reduce the problems caused by unfit mothers having babies.
I do not believe that the conservative right has any such interests. On the contrary, they not only oppose abortion, but are also against social programs designed to help low income families, where teenage pregnancies are most common, and consistently try to prevent birth control from becoming more available.
Want to get rid of abortion? Then let's work to stop the pregnancies before they start. First and foremost, the morning after pill (which is only a high dose of birth control, not an abortion pill) should be available over the counter. Second, teenagers should have easy access to all methods of birth control at minimal expense and with the promise of anonymity. Third, we should implement programs to help young mothers raise their children with adequate health care.
It is also vital that these parents have access to child care (either subsidized by the government or paid for through welfare funds).
Both conservatives and liberals spend too much time debating the ethical issues that abortion creates and not nearly enough time investigating why it is that we need abortion at all.
The fact of the matter is that we have a problem in this country that needs to be solved. Lets shut up and get to work.
