I find the opinions that many pro-choice advocates express to be inconsistent.

For example, in the Laci Peterson case, many opposed charging the killer with two counts of homicide. They also oppose federal legislation that would make it a separate crime to harm a fetus during the commission of a federal crime. The reason often given is that they do not want the right to abortion to be weakened.

But, if these people are truly pro-choice, and not just pro-abortion, they should support a woman’s choice to have a baby as vigorously as they support her choice not to.

A woman who wants a child should have the right to have that child fully protected by law even before it is born. After all, an eagle is fully protected by law even before it is hatched.

But, of course, that only leads to another inconsistency, because what a woman carries in her body is in no way changed by her opinion of it.

Laurel De Lige, Turner

Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.