To the editor:
In my last letter, I wrote about how the abortion issue isn't so easily sussed as right-to-lifers want us all to assume ("Of trolleys and forced birth," Oct. 1.) I used such terms as ectopic pregnancy, anencephaly and hydranencephaly, the definitions of which some may be unaware. If you are unfamiliar with the terms, once you've researched them you may be shocked and disgusted to learn that there are people who wouldn't allow exceptions to an abortion ban to accommodate these horrors. If you didn't read that last letter, or if, after reading it, you didn't take the time to research these conditions, I implore you to research them now. If, after seeing an anencephalic birth, you still think abortion is never a justifiable alternative I'll be surprised. (And frankly, I'll question your worth as a citizen of the world.)
I've spoken with people who believe abortion is wrong, but when told about how ectopic pregnancies are non-viable, and how continuing one after it's been diagnosed is lethal for the mother and the fetus, they almost universally acknowledge that it's one case where they would allow an exception (as if their permission is or should even be relevant.) However, Republican lawmakers in Ohio, the people with the authority to legislate such permission, upon hearing the ectopic pregnancy definition, put together legislation mandating that ectopic pregnancies be salvaged, that they be removed from their position outside of the womb and surgically reimplanted making them viable. None of them bothered to ask if this was surgically possible. For the record: It absolutely isn't.
Another exception many pro-lifers will allow is in the case of a very young girl who's been impregnated as a result of rape. Famously, after Republicans effectively (and temporarily) banned nearly all abortion in Ohio following SCOTUS's Roe v, Wade's overturn, news leaked concerning the case of a 10-year-old girl who had to seek an out-of-state termination when her rape and pregnancy were discovered after the expiration of the six-week window lawmakers had allowed for. Upon hearing the story, Republican Jim Jordan called the account a lie, at least until the rapist, one Gerson Fuentes, was arrested, confessed, and was convicted.
Now, let's consider these three scenarios: The fetus cannot survive outside of the womb, the mother cannot survive the pregnancy, or a girl -- a child herself -- is impregnated as the result of a vicious rape. If you -- like most decent people -- think these should be exceptions to rape bans, then you are acknowledging that abortion isn't always wrong. Again, you recognize that abortion isn't always wrong. Unfortunately, leaving it in the hands of Republican lawmakers, these exceptions don't exist.
Who should decide if any particular instance of abortion is wrong? Not me, not you and clearly not Republican legislators.
The decision should be left to a woman and her doctor, not in exceptional cases, but in every case. Otherwise, we're cherry-picking permissions based on individual bureaucrats and their whims of conscience. Vote in favor of the reproductive bill of rights.
J. David Core
Toronto