Web Letters: Regrets Only

subject to debate

By Katha Pollitt

This article appeared in the May 14, 2007 edition of The Nation.

April 26, 2007

Write a Web letter about this article.

What's a Web Letter?

Web Letters are continuously published e-mails from real people, signed with their real names. No registration is required. Each article page on The Nation includes a Web Letters link.

Read the best Web Letters on this page.

We're committed to publishing your comments as they are received. We place a red star () on the best submissions and may edit your e-mail for length or content. Your e-mail address will not be published or shared with any third party without your consent.

If you prefer, you may submit a letter to the print edition only.

We look forward to hearing from you.

  • Thank you. I'm glad someone finally said it. Our so-called "liberal media" has really let us down on this one.

    No one is explaining when and why this procedure is used. An OB/GYN friend of mine explained that these procedures are only used when something is seriously wrong with the fetus. For example, the fetus doesn't have a brain. Or the brain is outside the skull.

    These are by and large women who have no choice. They can have an abortion now or they can wait, go through the agony of delivery, and watch their new baby die a horrible death a few hours after birth. What kind of choice is that? These abortions are still going to happen. They'll just be less safe.

    Now these women, who really wanted to have a healthy baby but just found out they can't, must undergo a more dangerous procedure that risks puncturing their internal organs and has a higher risk of causing sterility.

    Thanks, Justice Kennedy. You're a real Christian.

    Annette Luther

    Minneapolis, MN

    05/04/2007 @ 08:29am


  • Thank you, Katha, for laying bare the whole ugly story of this Supreme Court decision. We are truly on the slippery road to a nightmare world where women’s lives are valued less than the microscopic cells of an embryo. The anti-woman right wing pretends they are the only ones with a moral stance. But many mainstream religions do value women’s lives. Judaism, for example, I believe maintains as a moral principle that an adult woman is valuable to her family and society, and if a fetus inside her attacks her health, a doctor has a moral duty to save the woman first. Her family would agree. And ordinary common sense tells us the same thing. I will send a donation to NYAAF as you suggest.

    Nina Walls

    Ridley Park, PA

    04/30/2007 @ 5:37pm


Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» Act Now!

Coal Country | "This is a civil war."
Peter Rothberg
31 Comments

» The Notion

A Blow to Privatization in Israel (and Perhaps Beyond) | A potentially historic ruling on prison privatization, in Israel.
Eyal Press
17 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

Can China Help on Afghanistan? | Beijing wants a broader role in the Middle East and South Asia. Will Obama bring them in?
Robert Dreyfuss
33 Comments

» Editor's Cut

Around the Nation | The week we went Rouge. Plus, Moyers on Afghanistan.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
81 Comments

» The Beat

Health Care Bill Advances, as Harry Reid Trumps Sarah Palin | The death panelist-in-chief rallied her followers to "KILL THE BILL." But 60 senators decided to follow the real leader.
John Nichols
103 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | The "Second Amendment" sale; the raving paranoids of the right.
Eric Alterman