GOP abortion stance cracks: Your Say

Because of objections — many from GOP women — House Republicans last week pulled a bill that would have banned abortions after 20 weeks. Comments from Facebook are edited for clarity and grammar:

Once again, another apparent total cave-in by the Republicans. Either that, or there is no difference between them and the Democrats. They need to learn to compromise (with each other) in the short term for the long-term benefits.

— Johnny Rose

I'm not sure that this is embarrassing for anyone; it shows there is dialogue and debate. A bill gets presented to Congress, and problems are found. This isn't anything new.

I'm glad lawmakers are picking the bill apart because we don't want bills passed resulting in problematic law. In addition, you can still have a pro-woman standpoint from both sides of the abortion debate.

— Michele Nagel

Ideally, every pregnant woman planned for and wants that child. Ideally, every father wants and will support that child. But we live in a world of sin, incest, rape and immorality causing unwanted pregnancies. Then there are medical reasons to terminate pregnancies.

I don't have all the answers, but I surely wouldn't trust that decision to a bunch of old white men.

— Cynthia Quen

Every woman should be able to decide for herself what happens to her body and anything her body produces. The fact that the courts and government are intervening on matters like this is sickening.

— Marcus Brooks

Respect for life includes gun control

Letters to the editor:

Finally, an anti-abortion activist recognizes the duplicity of opposing both abortion and gun control ("Twin terrors: abortion, gunfire: Column"). The Rev. Rob Schenck speaks the truth when he argues that one cannot be selectively "pro-life." Those who claim to be pro-life must embrace life in all its dimensions. The value of protecting the life of those of us here and now is at least equal to that of a fetus. To those who oppose abortion, guns must be viewed as destructive as forceps.

Bill Benham; The Woodlands, Texas

Although I agree with the Rev. Rob Schenck that pro-lifers need to have a consistent ethic of life, his argument contains several flaws. First, every abortion results in the ending of a human life, whereas human lives are ended by firearms when they are misused and in certain other cases.

Second, if Schenck wants the anti-abortion movement to expand its advocacy of human rights, we must take positions on global warming, unionization rights, child labor and globalization issues. This approach would only fragment the pro-life movement.

Third, we will never win the approval of those who believe in abortion rights. For the supporters of reproductive choice, life is about the freedom to make decisions.

Schenck's position would divide the pro-life movement, would do nothing to open a dialogue with those supporting choice, and would give support to those wanting to erode civil liberties by using Christianity as a cover.

Fulton J. Waterloo; Aston, Pa.