071280 The 1.3 million children killed annually in the United States through abortions far exceeds the number killed by terrorists in dictatorial countries.

To the Editor:

In her July 8, 1980 account of the hearing that was held in the County Legislator's chambers to consider the bill which would require doctors to notify the parents of unmarried minors before they aborted their children, Donna Greene touched on a few of the salient facts. She reported that 43 spoke against and 26 spoke in favor of the legislation and that "There were impassioned pleas and political threats." She listed the names of the organizations in whose behalf the speakers claimed to be speaking. Understandably her report was superficial; she did not have sufficient time to make in-depth evaluations.

What importance should be attached to the 43-26 ratio? More than a few of the 43 were either directly or indirectly benefiting financially by providing abortions or abortion related services. If the ratio 43-26 is of paramount importance, Mr. O'Rourke could have saved valuable time simply by asking those who had signified an interest in making a presentation to indicate their preference by a show of hands and then dispensing with the actual talks. Many of the 43 were not overly concerned about the merits of the legislation; they were more concerned with its effect on their earnings a living. The ratio 43-26 is of little value.

One of the techniques used to influence legislators, particularly when one's arguments are weak, is to beat the bushes to muster a large turn-out. The upper echelons of pro-abortion advocates have long known that the arguments they have been presenting are not based on facts. In 1971 Norma Zarky, author of the ACLU brief in the California Belous case, warned those attending an abortion sponsored symposium to be careful in using the argument that anti-abortion laws restricted the fundamental rights of two people, namely a woman and her doctor, because such a fundamental right was nowhere set forth explicitly in the Constitution.

Planned Parenthood, ACLU, and NOW, knowing that their arguments are built on sand, have spent large sums of money on logistics. At Monday's meeting, five-inch circular paste-ons containing the single word "Choice" were handed out to all those who would accept and wear them. If one investigated the nature of the choice being sought, one learned that pro-abortionists want the opportunity to indulge not only in responsible marital sex but also in irresponsible pre- and extra-marital sex. Since none of the contraceptives now available provide absolute protection against impregnation, pro-abortionists consider killing the preborn necessary as a back-up. The fact that they are killing their own children does not seem to faze them in the least, or so they say.

Displaying placards is banned at hearings. The logistical replacement that was in evidence on July 7 was the inscription, "The American Way", in two-inch high letters on 8 x 11 sheets. Is it the "American Way" to kill preborn human beings who are innocent of all wrong-doing? German doctors, lawyers, and judges who participated in killing the psychotic, the retarded, the aged, and the non-Aryans were severely castigated in the Nuremberg trials. Reading the accounts of the purges and pogroms carried out in Russia chills one's blood as do the terrorist activities now in progress in parts of Africa and the Middle Fast. The 1.3 million children killed annually in the United States through abortions far exceeds the number killed by terrorists in dictatorial countries.

Another favorite and often used logistical technique employed by pro-abortionists, who are members of the inner circle, is to preface their talk with a long, impressive list of qualifications, degrees, offices held, and years of experience all intended to impress legislators and spectators alike. Such credentials are meant to fill pro-life advocates with awe and create doubts in their minds. People are supposed to think that surely here is someone who knows what he is talking about. It was distressing to hear M.D.s speaking approvingly of abortion when they are fully aware that it means the death of a baby. It was more distressing to hear members of the clergy advocating and condoning this killing. It was most distressing to hear mothers of teenagers, who themselves had submitted to abortions, say that they would encourage a pregnant daughter to have her baby killed.