All lives should be valued, mothers and the unborn
Karen Hackenberry's article on reproductive choice being a necessary right was a very well written article, but I must to take issue with a few points she made.
Yes, America should be a country where there is social equity and each person should be able to live according to his or her own beliefs. If the "true meaning of Roe is that women no longer have to be the victims of fate," what about the other parties involved? What about the men who have fathered these children? Aren't they victims of fate? I know that many of these men have no desire to be fathers and would love to see the pregnancy end, but what about the many men who would love to be fathers but have no choice in the matter? You say "Men increasingly choose to embrace active parenthood." Shouldn't the men who want to be fathers have that right?
What about the biggest victims of fate, the millions of unborn children who are aborted every year? Many pro-choice activists speak about the mother's right but what about the rights of the unborn child? Who speaks for those who can't speak for themselves? I have heard animal rights activists argue that they must speak up for the animals who do not have a voice, shouldn't we speak up for children who are unable to speak for themselves? The unborn child is just that, a child. We have classified the unborn child as a fetus to salve our consciences thus enabling us to kill the unwanted child. This is what abortion really is, it is the killing of a living human being. Ms. Hackenberry is correct, "Reproductive choice has always been a moral choice." Shouldn't we as moral human beings seek the high moral ground? To me, morality seeks life, not the termination of the innocent.
I must also admit that I was unaware that "pro-choice clergy" founded the first abortion clinics as Ms. Hackenberry claims. I can't help but wonder why these clergy members would establish an abortion clinic instead of an adoption agency? As a member of the clergy, I find the term "pro-choice clergy" an oxymoron. I believe that every life (mothers, fathers, children, and unborn children) has value to God and therefore should be valued by society. The thought of any clergy being pro-choice and supporting the aborting of any person made in the image of God is, to me, quite contradictory to their calling.
There is an alternative to abortion. Adoption is a viable option especially since many married couples have been robbed of "their choice to become parents." Those who find themselves with an "unwanted pregnancy" have a choice they can give their child up for adoption and save a life and even enrich the lives of others.
X The Rev. Mr. Stinson is the pastor of Cornersburg Baptist Church.
Isn't Traficant just like any other politician?
All of the machinations surrounding the upcoming trial of Congressman James Traficant raise questions in my mind, such as:
What has Mr. Traficant done that every other politician hasn't done? In the respect that like the law of physics that states "for every action there is an opposite reaction," when business people donate money to people in office or running for office, they expect something for it.
How many times have people in office accepted a lunch, breakfast or dinner from someone? That could technically be construed as a bribe.
How many favors have been done for political people with a return of some kind of favor expected?'
If Mr. Traficant's actions are considered bribery in some instances, then the prosecution is making plea bargains with witnesses against Mr. Traficant that are also bribes and people doing the bribery should be held accountable.
The list could go on, and I certainly do not know what crimes Mr. Traficant has committed. However, I'm quite sure we could find worse with other members of Congress. I do not condone wrong-doing anywhere; but this looks like a witch hunt.
JOSEPH P. HILKO