Show some compassion for the born

Women do have a choice! They can decide to spread thier legs or not and can choose to use birth control or not. Despite abortion being so free and accessible we still have working poor etc being a drain on society as Pullen puts it. The problem is that all these social programs fund unwed pregnancies and out of wed lock births. We pay people to have children they can't take care of!! Almost 50% of the population recieve earned income tax credits, read hand out, or pay no taxes or minimal taxes now.

What ever happened to parents teaching their children about morals?

My Father taught me a long time ago that yes this is a free country to do pretty much as you choose. He told me the biggest restriction to doing whatever I want is that my rights end when I start in infringe on someone else's rights. I think the same thing applies to abortion. A woman has a right to choose what she wants for her body UNTIL she starts to infringe upon the rights of the human being inside her. And make no mistake, it is a human being no matter what stage of development.

I think abortion (because of inconvenience) should be expanded to cover those with such a narrow, tunnel vision perspective as Jewel. Someone who feels the need to "choice" something could just abort someone like Jewel. All of a sudden, I bet the pro-choice perspective wouldn't appear so attractive to the letter writer.

Don't try to understand republican hypocrisy it is all over the place. Yesterday Rush bashed Kadhafi for hours saying he was a lunatic America shouldn't listen to him but that he is a genius on the subject of Barack Obama. It Kadhafi is crazy which he is how can you take him serious only when he says something about Obama. Or Glenn Beck saying getting the Olympics doesn't benefit America this from a guy that wants us to believe he is so patriotic. I could go on but the right and their mouthpieces define hypocrisy. So why should taking care of children be any different.

Well said Jewel! AS for aborting Jewel, I think it's kinda hypocritical and silly to talk about aborting adults, it's also physically impossible...And embryos are not considered human beings, and a unviable fetus isn't either. Irrational thought and "wishing" my definitions and ideology into fact don't cut the butter in the real world, and just because you may say "make no mistake" doesn't make it true... It amazes me the level of fascination certain segments of the population have with the reproductive cycle of women. It's all about trying to control others..

A very thoughtful letter and correctly nails Conservatives as hypocrites, further, they have exactly the same flawed concept on matters of race. "Small government" they cry, but review the states with (R) governors and you'll find federal dollars keeping their states afloat. Why not return the federal dollars? Then, they elect a minority as Chair of the (R) party, specifically to attack the president and not have racial undertones. It has not worked, just like their foolish attempts to ban a woman's rights to be free. Again, well-said about a political party that will soon go the way of the Whigs.

concerned: Excellent points, the answer is simple: These people are not patriots they are capitalist who are soley focused on manipulating the uneducated elements of society that listen to them..And they simply hate PBHO because he represents empowerment and a change in the status quo for people they dislike.. Fortunately the vast majority of people know the games they play. Everything they say or do is for personal economic gain, and patriotism is just a word they use when they are in front of those who walk around with a american flag attached to a flagpole stuck up their posterior orifice.

justus4, good points. It is amazing to me that a party could understand race and gender so poorly. The select Steele to counter Obama and they select S Palin to get Hillary voters. Now how could a rational party think that would work. The repubs always appoint/select minorities but very rarely vote/elect them. Steele, Lynn Swann, Herman Cain, etc. JC Watts is the last high profile elected official they had. Mel Martinez was the last hispanic and he rode in on Jeb's coattail. So no elected leadership. Their base will not vote for minorities so the higher ups appoint some Rice, Powell, Gonzales, C Thomas, Steele, etc. But it says something about a party that will not vote for minorities.

How come if a criminal shoots a pregnant women in the abdomen he can be charged with murder of the baby yet an abortioner can kill a fetus at about any age of developement and it is OK? More liberal illogical lunacy and they call us hypocrites? Nativeson on Wed Sep 30, 2009 7:24 AM How come the military is more conservative than liberal? I guess those conservitives in the militray putting thier life on the line only care about themselves and those hugh military paychecks?www.spectacle.org/198/wilson.html

Stop paying the welfare broodmares to download the little hoodrat thugs would be a great first step. When the first out-of-wedlock baby is born, tie the woman's tubes so that no more werlfare dollars are wasted and the broodmare's income is capped. If the baby-mama later gets married and becomes a responsible member of society, then she can have the tube-tieing reversed if the couple want more children. This one act would go a long way towards reducing the growing lower class population.

concernednative, your 7:06 makes no sense. Did you use up all of your reasoning powers yesterday when you posted your only unprejudiced comment ever?

Why is it Pro choice and gay rights are always together? Things that make one go mmm mmm mm!

Killing babies means you have freedom from manipulation. Good reasoning. You're right lefties, I would have NEVER come up with that good idea.

drain on society? what about mommy and daddy? pregnancy is totally preventable. i can see rape and incest, but abortion to fix party fouls is unconsionable. the usual lack of responsiblity promoted by the left.

Jewel Pullen, you fired up for the LWV meeting?

I am against abortion. But, as a resonable person after years of it being legal I know it will just go underground which would cause more harm.

"If we spend the money up-front on quality child-care programs, on a quality education for everyone, and on sex education,"-How is spending money on quality child-care programs going to help the birth rate? We have government sponsored child care now. There is currently money available to anyone who wants a quality education, Education cannot be forced on anyone, as is apparent in today's society. So, that shoots that proposal in the foot, And sex education: if one engages in the practice of sex, one stands a great risk of becoming pregnant, and also contracting a sexually transmitted disease. Of course we do have contraceptive practices to aid in the prevention of pregnancy. There, how much more sex education does one need since you think abstinence should not be practiced? Every solution listed by the author of this letter is one that is up to the individual. Society cannot take responsibility for those who will not take resposibility for themselves.

Native son: Who "considers" whether an embryo/fetus is a "person" or not? Who makes that fateful choice? Are you qualified? Is a medical scientist? Is a Supreme Court justice? I don't know of anyone who can say that conclusively. Therefore, until we know for sure, it is entirely possible that yes, abortion is killing a real human being. I'd much rather err on the side of caution than terminating a life (and a fetus IS alive; no doubt about that) and hoping that I've not committed murder. Very slippery slope we are treading upon. Abortion just may be the ultimate control of others. Watch the hypocrisy in what you preach.

years ago it was a federal crime to destroy the bald eagles nest and its eggs either by accident or design. why the eagle was considered an endangered species. the thinking was valid. afterall an eagle would come out of an eagle egg. no one thought it was a piece of tissue without purpose. why is it that those who could see that logic can not realize a fetus is a human and not just tissue.

Jewel's use of "underprivileged" betrays her mindset. What real "privileges" do we have? We have a right to liberty (unless the gov't takes it away), life (but some would take this from the unborn), and the PURSUIT of happiness. Happiness is not a right or privilege. The right to pursue happiness is. It's not about privilege or entitlement; it's about the right to make choices that will bring happiness. If I choose to steal, get into the drug culture, or drop out of school because I got pregnant, that's my right. If I choose to stay in school, get a job, and work for a living, that is my right. But, choices have consequences, and if I make bad choices I have the privilege to do so; however, I can't then claim I'm "underprivileged" and have a right to demand that those who made wiser choices must now support me and my family because I'm not as happy as I want to be. Yes, we all make mistakes and deserve to try and better our situation. There are programs to help those who are trying to work their way up. But, it's not about privileges. It's about pursuing happiness by making wise, lawful choices. It's about personal accountability and responsibility for one's own actions.

howcanweknow 9:08 ... Excellent post!

55 F-100, you betray your dehumanizing prejudices once more with the use of "broodmare". You sound frustrated. What--no woman in your life you can control? btw, you can't just "reverse the tube-tying" like some reproductive toggle switch.

the opposite of pro-life has to be pro-death. Where is the vote from the baby? A woman may have a right to do what she wants with her body but how about the body of the baby? By the way prohibition of alcohol worked very well; crime went down, health went up; just read the facts.

Crime went down with prohibition? What about all the bootleggers and speak-easy saloons? Read your facts. People still found a way to get their booze. You claim you want smaller government right? Less government interference? Can't be selective.

Yes, Soldout. That is exactly why the the pro-death crowd is working hard to replace the term "pro-life" with their preferred phrase, "anti-choice". That's an attempt at political whitewashing to avoid the tragic truth. Very Orwellian. Like saying we're all human, but an unborn child is "less human" than others. "1984" all over again.

carcraft; Men have a choice also! Put a cover on it, or don't ask for it!!! That is the problem, when it comes to the disscusion about abortion, men are the first to make a comment, and the last to accept the fact, that it takes two, to make a baby.In all the for, or against abortion disscusions, where is the talk about the man? You people can not have it both ways.Make all the babies you can, and when they get here , you are the ones that say,no healthcare, no section 8,not my taxes etc..I don't think men, should have a say about what women do with thier bodies.Yes women should think before they decide to get pregnant, but men need to think before they ''get' them pregnant!!!

I still remember the days of "coat hanger" surgery and finging teenage girls dead in alleys. But it was only poor girls, the well heeled sent their little darlings overseas on vacation ot to study.

Concernednative, I can't believe you would spend hours listening to two confirmed drug addicts one of which was a confirmed alkaholic. It should be noted that both are well educated however, they both have high school diplomas, unless one has awarded himself a "diploma" from the institute of higher learning. Yeah I think that is what is wrong with the U.S.A, idiots advising idiots what they need to know.

mommie2 in spite of this deliberate policy of non-enforcement, Prohibition: 1 Reduced the fatality rate from cirrhosis of the liver by more than 50 percent. 2 Reduced the consumption of absolute alcohol by almost 70 percent. 3 Closed down most alcoholic clinics and hospital wards for lack of business. 4 Greatly reduced the crime rate and prison population. Thomas Alva Edison, the great inventor, said in 1930, "I feel that Prohibition is the greatest experiment yet made to benefit man." President Charles W. Elliot of Harvard University vigorously opposed the adoption of Prohibition, but in 1922 he said: "Evidence has accumulated on every hand that Prohibition has promoted public health, public happiness and industrial efficiency. Prohibition is actually sapping the terrible forces of disease, poverty, crime, and vice."