072878 Response to Randy Simon's 072278 letter
476 6738
From her letter in The Reporter Dispatch, July 22, 1978, it is evident that Randy Simon has accepted the pro-abortion, line at face valve.
Right-to-lifers are not fabricating as arbitrary code of conduct which they wont to impose on everyone. They are asking that the centuries-old rules be applied to the preborn as the abolitionists asked that these rules be applied to the Blacks.
As is clear from their 1976-1980 Manifesto, it is Planned Parenthood who In actively striving to impose their code of conduct an everyone. They see their mission as a comprehensive campaign for "modifying attitudes, behavior changes and/or/skills" an abolishing" the arbitrary and outmoded restrictions - legal, regulatory and cultural - which continue to limit the individual's freedom of choice in fertility matters." It 's PP's goal to eliminate any moral standards that would inhibit their view of what population control should be.
To spread their views the pro-abortionists have infiltrated the media, professional organizations, educational institutions, churches, civil-liberty organizations and community health agencies. They use the medical services they offer as a channel through which they can gain entrance to and "hold authority in the councils where national decisions are made." It is PP rather than RTL that is forcing its will on the people.
In any discussion of freedom one basic notion that must be kept in mind is that freedom is not an absolute. If anyone does as he wishes when be wishes; anarchy reigns. Each individual's rights are limited when these impinge on the rights of another.
Our culture is based on the premise that individuals have the power to choose to act, or to retrain from acting; and that they are responsible for the costs and consequences that follow from their choice.
Let us build a hypothetical case. While a woman is busy about her household tasks, a total stranger enters her apartment, attacks and dismembers her. He is apprehended.
'The relatives and neighbors of the victim =W be inclined to hold a kangaroo court or to employ a "hit person" to remove the perpetrator from society, but they may not. He is entitled to have a trial by jury. Since it is current practice not to execute: those convicted of even the most heinous crimes, it is not likely that he will be deprived of his life. Execution is inhumane !Inconsistent though it obviously
been given permission to engage what may be as a "hit person" to invade her womb to dismember the person who is peacefully residing there and who is incapable of a committing any crime warranting the death penalty. Certainly if society is unwilling to kill a convicted rapist and killer, society should be more reluctant to permit the killing of this innocent child.
It is interesting to note that those "libbers" who are most disturbed, alleging that they are not treated as "persons", are by and large the very ones who are actively campaigning to deprive preborn persons of their "unalienable" right to their life.
of human life soon spreads to disrespect for other segments. Holocaust 1 began when the psychiatrists executed five institutionalized mental patients. It culminated in the mass execution of Jews and others who were deemed too expensive to maintain or were otherwise undesirable.
The preborn are now being killed "legally" In the United States. Doctors are covertly killing the deformed, the mentally and physically handicapped, the Incurable, the senile, the children of the poor, those whose organs are needed to replace the defective ones of others. We are already well on the way to Holocaust II.
When unleashed, Man's inhumanity to men knows no bonds. Right-to-lifers are sounding the alarm.
Patrick H. McHugh