To the Readers' Forum:
Time magazine recently ran a most ridiculous cover story entitled, "40 years ago, abortion rights activists won an epic victory with Roe v. Wade - They've been losing ever since." It's ridiculous because abortion is still permitted in all 50 states for virtually any reason at all.
Abortion activists today talk about the threat to so-called "reproductive rights," but this phrase is nonsensical. Who is trying to deny anyone a right to reproduce? A real example of denying a bona fide "reproductive right" is in China, with it's one child policy or forced sterilization campaigns. But in the United States there is no threat to the right to reproduce, despite what abortion rights activists would tell us. What they mean is a woman's right to an abortion, a right to kill an unborn child, a right to pre-birth infanticide. This has nothing to do with the right to reproduce. When two people consent to sex they de facto consent to reproduce; they are exercising their right to reproduce, even if they don't have that in mind. But what abortion rights activists actually want is the right to kill, yes, murder the child that results from the natural act of procreation. So when abortion activists talk about "reproductive rights" they are speaking falsely. On the other hands, when pro-life activists speak of fighting for the right to life of unborn babies, they are speaking truthfully. There really is a "right to life" issue at stake.
It's bad enough that millions upon multiple millions of unborn babies have been killed through abortion, let's not let abortion activists now try to play the victim by claiming their "reproductive rights" are being threatened. There is no threat to reproductive rights. Abortion isn't a reproductive right - it's murder, period.