Pro-choice disputed, abortion condemned
Woman’s choice
should be made
before pregnancy
In reference to Scott Keeler’s let
ter (letter to the editor, DN, Oct. 24),
I would like to comment on the “re
education” he feels is necessary con
cerning the use of the word “pro
choice.”
Let’s get down to brass tacks. “Pro
choice” is a euphemism. It’s a lot
easier to gain support for the pro
abortion stance if you tell people that
it’s a matter of individual choice.
“Pro-choice” doesn’t sound as much
like you’re killing a human being as
“pro-abortion” docs.
A woman’s choice as to whether
or not to have a baby should be made
before she is pregnant.
Now, you can call me “pro-life” or
you can call me “anti-abortion.” It
doesn’t matter to me. I don’t feel the
need to “sugar-coat” my stand on a
life and death issue.
Thomas J. Baumcrt
sophomore
engineering
Reader says abortion
personal decision;
leave politics out
I am sick and tired of hearing and
reading about abortion!!! It is every
where you go. This issue is tearing
our country apart. You have the “pro
choice” activist on one side of the
street and the “pro-life” activist on
the other. What the hell is happening
here?
Don’t get me wrong, it is not that I
don’t care, I do very much. I look
around at what is happening and it
downright depresses me. Abortion, in
my eyes, is a very private and per
sonal decision, but look what has
happened here, it has turned out to be
a political war. Ask yourself, where
are the politics in this issue? I sure
cannot find any.
All I sec arc a bunch of people
running around trying to make deci
sions for others. That’s not right. I
just wish people would wake up and
sec that abortion always has been
here and it will be here until the end of
time. It is either going to happen in a
clean, safe clinic or in a dirty back
alley.
I am not saying that you should
abandon what you believe. I respect
what you believe, but you should
respect what I believe. I may not
believe that abortion is right, but I do
think that the choice should be there.
I know that many of you arc sitting
there in total disgust of what 1 just
staled, but then again 1 am sure there
arc a lot of things that I believe are
right that you don’t. That’s life! Ev
eryone has separate set of values. For
some reason, though, everyone seems
to think thaton the subject of abortion
everybody should agree. That goes
for both sides of the issue. Let’s meet
each other halfway — that is the only
way we are going to resolve this prob
lem.
Robin Schanzer
sophomore
elementary education
No woman should
have legal right
to kill her baby
To re-educate Scott W. Keeler
(letter to the editor, DN, Oct. 24) and
others who arc confused about the
“pro-choice” misnomer, read on.
One would think that “pro-choicers”
would attempt to protect the rights to
choose of all those involved, namely
the mother, the father and the baby.
One could even argue that society
also should have the right to choose,
in that it would be affected by the
influence of another human being,
positively or negatively. However,
we see that the “pro-choicers” are
actually “anti-choice” to the baby
trying to be bom, “anti-choice” to a
society that needs all the help it can
get and even most regrettable is that
the so-called “pro-choicers” even deny
God the choice — who has already
made his choice, creating a new life
for a purpose.
So, we see that the “pro-choice”
label is a misnomer. People who
support a woman’s choice to kill her
baby rather than help her choose re
sponsible and loving alternatives are
simply misguided sociopaths So you
sec that the more filling term “pro
abortion” is gentle compared to what
“pro-choicers” could be called.
Just as people, living in a civilized
society, do not have the legitimate
choice to murder another human being,
no matter how unwanted they are,
neither should a a woman have the
legal choice to murder her own baby
The cold-blooded murder of an abor
tion makes me wonder about the le
gitimacy of the hot passionate “love”
in the bedroom. Let’s stop killing.
Doug Wittmann
senior
sociology
Pocketbook power
makes businesses
stand, take notice
“Protests are us?”
Mr. Hansen, really, if you want to
be able to be taken as a credible
source of critical thought as far as the
environment movement on this cam
pus goes, you really should find out
more about what you’re talking about
before you start making unfounded
statements that will show you up for
some kind of poltroon. As it is, your
comments (letter to the editor, DN,
Oct. 25) do a rather thorough job of
exposing your brash ignorance of
Ecology Now to anyone with even a
passing understanding of the organi
zation.
In the first place, your attitude
toward publicity is really rather juve
nile. It is truly inane to put forth the
idea that publicity-generating events
are not worthwhile. Our society runs
on publicity. Today,careers and ideas
and even people themselves arc at the
mercy of the “make ‘cm or break
‘cm” world of public relations.
Protests and demonstrations arc
effective ways of making the pollut
ers like Mr. Coors know that they
have to tacc up to past records ant!
make improvements such as the ones
he outlined for you. It is also one way
to show consumers that there are
problems out there.
You have a lot of gaul, Mr. Hansen,
but without a doubt you do the best
job of showing your ignorance when
you accuse Ecology Now of being
afraid of “getting their hands dirty.”
You obviously were not on hand when
we held a recycling drive in concert
with R.E.M. last year, no pun in
tended. Wecollcctcd more than 1,300
poundsof aluminum,and raised more
than S650 for the planting of trees at
Pioneers Park. Is that worthwhile
enough for you? Sorry, but we got a
lot of publicity too, oops.
You obviously don’t know any
thing about the cleanups we have
done for Clean Community Systems.
You make a pretty loud noise about
our not planting any trees “for kids to
enjoy.” I guess that that is due to the
fact that you weren’t with us when we
went up to Fort Robinson State Park
on two different occasions to help in
the replanting of some 10,000 seed
lings to help repair the damage from
the fire that ravaged the park in 1988.
It is truly disappointing that your
letter has such a feel of an apology to
it. First of all, it seems to be an apol
ogy for Mr.Coors—the prodigal son
made good. And secondly, it seems
like an apology to Mr. Coors for the
“Protests arc us.”
Don l sell the rest ol us, and your
self as well, so short. To say that we
must go to the corporations because
“. . . they have money, power, and
political support, and they can do just
about anything they want to” is to
cave in to the same impotent reliance
on a spoon-fed world that has led us to
the brink of ecological disaster that
we are now looking over. We arc the
ones with the power of the pocket
book that can make them stand up and
take notice.
Mark Buhrdorl
senior
arts and sciences
“The first time I saw a Macintosh, I was immediately
hooked. It’s a work of art. I saw die student
pricing and my next move was obvious: get one.
“Some other computers are cheaper, but they’re
a pain to learn, and working on them can be
a grueling experience. Last year, a friend
bought anodier kind of computer against
my advice and has used it for maybe 15
hours. What a waste.
“Macintosh, on die odier hand, is a logical
extension of die mind. It lets you concentrate on
what’s in your paper, not on how to get it on
paper. You can create professional-looking
documents in minutes, and you lose die fear of
learning new programs because they all work
in the same way.
“Once you’ve worked with a Macintosh,
there’s no turning back”
Computing Resource Center
Computer Shop
University Bookstore
Lower Level Nebraska Union
472-5785 Hours: 8:00am - 5:00pm
*
Why do UNL Students love Macintosh?
Ask them.
!i i
Pro-choice means
woman takes life
of an unborn human
Scott Keeler recently wrote that
“pro-choice” is not the same as “pro
abortion” (letter to the editor, DN,
Oct. 24). He says pro-choice means
“pro-let the woman make her own
decision.” Decision about what?
You forgot one thing, Scott — to
fill in the black left dangling by the
phrase “right to choose.” Abortion is
choosing to lake the life of the living
human being in the womb.
We don’t allow people to choose
to assault, murder, or steal from oth
ers. We don’t allow employers to
choose to discriminate against others
on the basis of race, religion, or gen
der. And we ought to prohibit moth
ers from choosing to lake the lives of
their unborn children.
Richard Duncan
law professor