Pro-Choice Group Distorts Morality

To the editors:

Forty-five million dead since 1973. Entire generations nonchalantly slaughtered as some stand by, chanting that they have the “choice” to kill the most innocent and vulnerable of all victims: children. Harvard-Radcliffe Students For Choice President Abigail L. Fee ’05 laments that “the current administration is surreptitiously attacking our reproductive rights instead of launching an overt campaign” and that “we could wake up to find that our reproductive freedoms have been snatched away” (Op-Ed, “Speak Up for Roe,” Feb. 5).

So what’s the problem? It’s about time we stop exterminating innocent unborn children based on the casual whims of morally bankrupt men and women quick to gratify carnal desires yet too selfish, lazy, and cold to take responsibility for their actions.

It’s time we apologize for denying the civil rights of unborn women and minorities. Conservatives shouldn’t appease anti-life militants by saying that so-called “choice” isn’t in jeopardy with our president. It is, as it should be.

Roe v. Wade has left a tainted legal, political and moral legacy that has all but killed the most fundamental human right—the right to life. The Roe ruling hinged on the premise that sufficient evidence to determine when life begins doesn’t exist. Therefore, the Supreme Court affirmed the most radically liberal abortion laws of any country in the Western world.

But since overwhelming scientific evidence has emerged to prove that life does indeed begin at conception, the case of Roe is obsolete. From the instant of conception, the unborn child is a living human being. He or she possesses a genetic code with 46 chromosomes, which contain complete information for characteristics such as gender, eye and hair color, skin tone, bone structure and the susceptibility to certain diseases.

Pro-abortion advocates also maintain that Roe helped prevent pro-lifers trying to impose their morality on others. If it were not proved that the unborn are fully human, pro-abortion advocates would be justified in their claim. But since the unborn are fully human, women receiving abortions infringe upon the right to life of the unborn and thus force their morality upon others as well.

It is horrifying to realize that because of one Supreme Court case, the fetal holocaust is hidden behind misleading euphemisms. Instead of saying that we murder unborn children, Roe has enabled us to say that we “abort fetuses” at the rate of 4,400 a day. The lady next door would never pay an abortionist to murder her unborn son. All she did was eliminate the “product of conception” because she did not want to subject her inconvenient offspring to an impoverished life. The legacy of Roe vs. Wade makes her decision to murder her unborn son not evil, but downright virtuous.

Sonia Mohammed

Feb. 5, 2003

The writer is an alumna of the University of Texas.