Letter: The problem with the pro-choice movementRecently I read the book “Embryo,” which eloquently defends the belief that life begins at conception using science and philosophy instead of religion.
By: Mike Bogle, Windom, Worthington Daily Globe
Recently I read the book “Embryo,” which eloquently defends the belief that life begins at conception using science and philosophy instead of religion.
What bothers me about “pro-choice” people is they don’t seem to care when life begins, but only when choice ends. The reason for this is they cannot coherently and consistently define when life begins, after rejecting conception.
At conception, a viable human being is in the beginning stages. The pro-choice position that the fetus is not viable until the umbilical cord is cut is illogical because the baby is still totally dependent on its parents to care for it. I know teenagers who still need them.
I’m uncomfortable with the Supreme Court deciding when a baby becomes a human being because, for many years, it said a black man never does.
Many pro-choicers are against the war in Iraq and wars in general because so many innocent people get killed. But what could be more innocent than a whole, healthy baby who has never seen a sunset or wild geese flying?