Goldstein’s ‘bizarre’ abortion piece
Dear Editor:
I am writing in regard to Roman Goldstein’s bizarre op-ed piece “A More Humane Alternative to Abortion” in the Jan. 26, 2004 Student Life. Mr. Goldstein’s argument rests on his belief that a fetus is a human being, and he points out that pro-choice advocates generally do not view fetuses in the same manner. In this assertion, he is more or less correct. What Mr. Goldstein does not recognize, however, is that abortion can be perfectly justified regardless of which view one holds regarding the status of a fetus. A human being cannot and should not be required to sustain another human being, particularly within one’s own body, if he/she does not consent to do so. Needless to say that the argument that becoming pregnant automatically means consent is obviously incorrect, as the women who wish to have abortions clearly will attest-it appears to be consent only for the people who do not have to make that choice. If Mr. Goldstein’s doctors told him that the only way he could survive (for the next 9 months) is through being hooked up to MY body (and mine only) day and night, Mr. Goldstein as a living human being (no argument there) has no right to use my body in such a way without my consent. A fetus has no such right either, regardless of how one may wish to classify it. A cannot make B’s rights disappear without B’s consent simply by proclaiming that A’s survival depends on B.
Furthermore, Mr. Goldstein’s infanticide idea is plain brilliant-except for at least one minor problem: since the baby is already born and no longer requires anything from the woman who gave it birth, having the mother kill it is actually murder. Perhaps the idea was tongue-in-cheek, but I’m glad that it actually served a very valuable purpose: it explicitly exhibited the difference between murder and abortion.
Julia Kreyskop
Class of 2003
Corrections:
1) Chi Omega was incorrectly reported to be the oldest sorority in the nation on Monday. It is actually the largest.
2) In Monday’s article entitled, “Prof arrested, released on abuse charges,” the headline should have indicated that the subject was an instructor, not a professor. Also, the description in the story of the subject’s job at the University should have been in the present tense.