Letter to the editor: “Andrea Keene’s selective morality is once again
showing through in her July 15 letter. This time she expresses her abhorrence
of abortion. But how we see only what we choose to see! I wonder
if any of the anti-abortionists have considered the widespread use of
fertility drugs as the moral equivalent of abortion, and, if they have,
why they haven’t come out against them, too. The use of these drugs
frequently results in multiple births, which leads to the death of one
of the infants, often after an agonizing struggle for survival. According
to the rules of the pro-lifers, isn’t this murder?”
Is this post hoc?
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html
Dear Editor,
In response to Andrea Keene's letter expressing her abhorrence of abortion, I would like to draw attention to another issue that may be worth considering. Keene questions whether anti-abortionists have taken into account the widespread use of fertility drugs, which can lead to multiple births and sometimes result in the death of one of the infants. Keene argues that if pro-lifers view abortion as murder, then shouldn't they also consider this outcome as such?
To address this question, it is important to understand the perspectives and arguments of those who are against abortion. Pro-life advocates commonly argue that the intentional termination of a pregnancy is morally equivalent to taking an innocent human life. They argue that life begins at conception, and therefore, any deliberate action that ends that life is considered morally wrong.
When it comes to fertility drugs, the situation is more complex. While the intention is typically to help individuals or couples conceive a child, the use of these drugs can indeed lead to multiple births. In some cases, this can result in complications and the death of one or more infants. However, it is crucial to note that the use of fertility drugs is not intended to cause harm or end a life. The desired outcome is the successful conception of a healthy child.
Pro-life advocates might argue that the intent behind fertility drug use differs from the intent behind abortion. Abortion involves a deliberate act to end a pregnancy, whereas fertility drugs aim to initiate and support pregnancy. They might argue that the death of a child due to complications arising from fertility drugs is considered an unintended consequence rather than a deliberate act.
Still, it is worth acknowledging that this issue raises ethical questions and may challenge the consistency of some pro-life arguments. Some individuals within the pro-life movement might indeed oppose the use of fertility drugs due to the potential harm and unintended consequences they can bring.
In conclusion, while Andrea Keene raises an interesting point regarding the use of fertility drugs, it is essential to consider the intentions behind these drugs and the distinctions between their usage and intentional abortions. Additionally, it is crucial to recognize that the opinions held within the pro-life movement might vary, and some individuals may, in fact, oppose the use of fertility drugs due to the potential harm they can cause.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]