Child’s ‘right to life’ should not be dismissed

To the editor:

Mark Begich, yesterday I was in Island to Island Vet Clinic and read on the wall something about how a man’s character is reflected by his treatment of animals. Mark, I suppose you’re kind to puppies, but what about human babies? I asked your Ketchikan office personnel if you had a published statement regarding abortion. They said “no” but indicated that you and Democrats in general supported a woman’s right to choose to kill her unborn child, that the father and or grandparents have no rights to protect the baby and that the baby has no rights in the womb; not until it takes its first breath — then instantly you protect the newborn by the full force of law. As if prior to birth, the baby was neither human, nor alive? Not scientific! Not compassionate! To me, barbaric!

Given that Public Law 108-212 recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of more than 60 listed federal crimes of violence. How can you dismiss this child’s right to life under the misnomer of women’s health care?

Rob Holston

Ketchikan