Letter to the editor: Don’t like abortion? Try funding birth control | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Don’t like abortion? Try funding birth control

Letter-writer John Ventre (“Liberals & abortion”) says politicians “don’t see the bigger picture” because they allow fetuses to be aborted while we are losing population. George Wandell (“Logical, truthful sex-ed lesson”) seems to feel similarly. But the really big picture is that this earth simply cannot sustain so many people.

I would challenge these men to show me any world problem that cannot ultimately be attributed to too many people, driving too many cars, heating ever bigger houses, burning more coal. Worse, we burn our candle at both ends by cutting more and more trees, nature’s greenhouse gas absorbers.

Climate change is not a Chinese hoax. Fake news, folks. If we don’t do something fast to control our population, nature will do it for us — by starvation, disease, and the inevitable wars over the remaining resources and land. Modern weapons are pretty scary, and would wipe us all out, fetuses and all.

It’s curious to me that so many pro-life people also object to birth control, the best agent against abortion. If these people were serious about wanting to reduce abortions, they would advocate government-funded birth control. That woman with 10 kids rarely wants another, but can’t afford the ongoing up-front costs of birth control, so she goes ahead with the next one, who will probably have 10 more kids. All on the public dole. Clearly, government-funded birth control is in the public interest.

Nobody likes abortions, but people, let’s be careful what we wish for.

Al Duerig

Salem


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.