This page was last updated on March 23, 2011.
Letter omitted pertinent details; Martin Schulte, Jr.; Beaver County Times; March 23, 2011. An editor’s note asserts “The writer is a former resident of Midland.”
Mr. Schulte wrote one previous letter I critiqued (“‘You, too’ charge can’t absolve right”) and at least one I did not [“A ‘remarkably backward’ letter,” 11/28/10 (no longer on the Times website)]. In the 11/28/10 letter, Mr. Schulte described himself as a “liberal.”
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“In reply to Monday’s letter to the editor (‘We shouldn’t tolerate abortion’), I offer some further details on abortion for consideration.
“Although the writer implies that the gory details of the D&E procedure are unknown to the public, I can easily find online a plethora of bloody, dismembered flesh, perhaps sufficient to satisfy his craving. Ghoulish anti-abortionists are more than happy to sell you posters, signs, or even business cards of such, to be publicized at every opportunity.”
[RWC] It didn’t take Mr. Schulte long to get into a personal attack and he ends the letter that way. If you read the subject letter, you find the author addressed only the issue and didn’t attack anyone, either personally or as a group.
The subject letter said, “not well known.” Regardless, who goes online to look for photos of killed unborn babies?
Keep an eye out for the issue Mr. Schulte never mentions.
“He unfortunately ignores such pertinent details as the gestational age when most abortions are performed - during the first trimester.”
[RWC] This sentence appears to imply the subject letter implied most abortions are performed after the first trimester. It did not in my opinion. To illustrate the violence done to the baby during an abortion, the letter simply mentioned one of the techniques used. Whether it’s the D&E or the “simpler” vacuum aspiration technique more commonly used during the first trimester, killing the unborn baby by sucking it out of its mother is a violent act. At least one report indicates drug-induced abortions made up about 17% of abortions in 2008. From what I can tell, nine weeks appears to be the upper limit for medical (drug-induced) abortions.
“He also does not mention reasons why late-term abortions are performed, such as women being pressured against abortion, or being afraid of their partner or family.”
[RWC] Mr. Schulte writes of “late-term abortions” though the subject letter didn’t use that term or imply it. The letter specifically mentioned “abortions at the three- to six-month point of a woman’s pregnancy” (12 to 24 weeks). The definition of “late-term abortion” appears to vary quite a bit so I don’t know how Mr. Schulte defines the term. That said, pro-abortion groups tend to define “late-term” as the third trimester and some use the term “late-term abortion” to refer specifically to partial-birth abortion. The McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine (2002) defines “late-term abortion” as “post-viability abortion.” That is, “Any abortion performed after the fetus would be viable if delivered to a nonspecialized health center.”
“In fact, many find it hard to make arrangements. That tends to happen when abortion clinics are legislated out of existence in some states, or when abortion doctors get harassed, threatened and murdered.”
[RWC] Mr. Schulte failed to mention a research article by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute indicated “women (who would have preferred to have had their abortion earlier) reporting specific reasons for the delay in obtaining an abortion, 2004” gave the same reasons for first- and second-trimester abortions, though the percentages varied. For example, in the “It took a long time to make arrangements” category, the figures were 56% and 67%, respectively. For “I was afraid to tell my husband/partner or my parents that I was pregnant,” the figures were 6% and 9%, respectively. For “Someone I am close to put pressure on me not to have an abortion,” the figure was 5% for both.
It appears Mr. Schulte isn’t against everyone being “harassed [or] threatened.” Though Mr. Schulte mentions harassment and threats here, and railed against perceived “right-wing” “violent rhetoric” in “‘You, too’ charge can’t absolve right,” he’s been silent regarding the harassment of and death threats made against Republican lawmakers and the governor of Wisconsin.
“By making it harder for women to have abortions, anti-abortionists are responsible for making more late-term abortions happen. He is, in fact, responsible for the details about which he complained. I certainly do not ignore that.”
[RWC] This is a lot like claiming we made Johnny speed on one part of a road because the limit on another part was too low.
In any case, the goal of “anti-abortionists” is to eliminate ALL abortions for convenience, not just abortions performed using certain procedures or conducted at a given gestation point. I’ll go out on a limb and guess “making it [easier] for women to have abortions” would not advance that goal. If Mr. Schulte has data showing the way to minimize/eliminate abortions for convenience is by “making it [easier] for women to have abortions,” he needs to present it.
The author of the subject letter “is, in fact, responsible for the details about which he complained?” Seriously? It’s just another personal attack against the subject author.
Finally, you’ll note Mr. Schulte didn’t address the central issue. Why should it be legal to kill an unborn baby for convenience?
© 2004-2011 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.