ShareThis Page

Pro-life vs. pro-birth

| Friday, June 5, 2015, 8:57 p.m.

In 2003, my beautiful daughter Chloe was born with a diagnosis of Down syndrome, and since her birth I have devoted my efforts to advocating for services like early intervention that focus on abilities and give persons like Chloe a hopeful life. I meet and communicate frequently with bipartisan policymakers to show how critical it is to invest in supports that provide the incalculable return of a fulfilling life.

I have told elected officials that if they cut funding to proven programs that assist individuals with disabilities, elderly people who need help, veterans recovering from wounds and trauma, persons suffering from mental health issues, and any other vulnerable citizens, they are not pro-life but only pro- birth.

I believe human beings are the culture's most precious gift and resource, and thanks to proper funding, individuals like Chloe can now live amazing lives after they are born. A society that refuses to protect and assist its most defenseless people will never prosper and thrive, and all of us are one accident, one illness or one mishap away from needing services that embrace and support life. During this budget season, please urge your elected representatives to be pro-life and not just pro-birth.

Kurt Kondrich

Upper St. Clair

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.