Letters to the Editor: They’re going after abortion because this is about controlling women

To the editor: I’m always amazed at the lack of consistency on the part of “pro-life” advocates. If they’re really so concerned about ensuring any and every pregnancy results in birth, why haven’t they moved to restrict men from getting vasectomies? (“Hang on to the pill and your IUD: After abortion, birth control is the next fight,” Opinion, April 12)

If women can’t shed an unwanted pregnancy, then men should not be able to prevent their sperm from causing one. Fair is fair, and equal treatment is supposedly constitutionally protected.

Sure, all of this is crazy, but let’s be honest and admit that all of this is about controlling women. Period.

Anita Rufus, Palm Desert

..

To the editor: I am pro-choice, but I cannot understand why many people who favor abortion rights do not acknowledge that those against abortion generally believe it is murder, and controlling women’s bodies is much less of an issue.

Until the first concern is addressed, the controversy will persist.

Furthermore, some pro-choice advocates favor abortion at any fetal age. The problem with even a partial compromise is the same problem we see in immigration reform and gun control: Each side does not trust the other, because some people do indeed want to ban guns, and some people do indeed want open borders.

In either case this isn’t the majority, but it’s enough to make the other side afraid of giving in on anything.

Andrew Bressler, Culver City

..

To the editor: Robin Abcarian’s column on the threat to birth control access is worthy and inspiring. But, I do not agree that “women of childbearing age in the United States should be very, very afraid.”

Rather, women should be very, very angry, so they can stand up and scream at the top of their lungs.

Women should be very, very angry, so they can protest against others who would take away their freedoms.

Women should be very, very angry, so they can move forward with determination and strength to end this war against us all.

Susan Kogan, Oceanside

..

To the editor: When the federal judge in Texas who ruled against mifepristone’s authorization mentions an “unborn child,” he’s purposely misrepresenting the fetus. He should be calling it an “unborn disrespectful teenager.”

Ted Herrmann, Los Angeles