Letter to the Editor

What difference?

Monday, September 20, 2004

Dear Editor,

By now, most everyone has heard about the terrorist takeover of the Russian school, where many people were injured and many killed, a lot of them children.

There was a huge outcry. People demanding something be done to stop these kinds of events from happening. About the same time, a judge in Lincoln, Neb., ruled the law banning partial birth abortion was unconstitutional because it failed to protect the health of the mother.

In this procedure, the baby's skull is punctured by the doctor just before the baby is completely delivered, and, of course, the baby dies.

Would someone please tell me how killing the baby protects the health of the mother? So far, I haven't heard much of an outcry about this.

One week later, I heard the story of the 23 year old woman who gave birth to a baby boy in her bathtub. She placed him in a plastic bag and threw him in the trash. She was caught and sentenced to 13 years in prison.

In the first case, the baby was killed by the doctor with the consent of the mother. In the second case, the mother acted alone. Both cases are premeditated, cold-blooded murder of a totally innocent, helpless human being.

The 23-year-old only killed once -- the doctor has killed many. Who do you think should get the worst punishment?

In the first case, both parties go free and the doctor gets paid for his "services."

All because judges have ruled it is legal to kill unborn babies.

Will the public demand that something is done to change this?

Raymond Durner,


Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: