To the editor:
Has Phill Kline gone too far or too far astray?
Kline is trying to establish that in Kansas a fetus at any stage of development is a person with full legal rights. To make this point he downgrades the woman's role in pregnancy to that of "host." Don't joke that the term should be "hostess." No, he means "host" in the sense that some trees and animals are hosts to parasites that live off them. This analogy reduces the fetus to a parasite, undermining the person argument and demeaning women.
Mark your 2006 calendars now so you will be sure to remember to celebrate "Host Day" formerly known at "Mother's Day."
Barbara M. Duke,
Lawrence
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
craigers (anonymous) says…
What is the difference of him changing the woman's name to host, which removes emotions when women try to make the unborn child a fetus in order to remove the emotion and make abortion easier. People use abortion to rid their bodies of a nuisance that they call a fetus. It is a baby, a child, somebodies future son or daughter, not just a scientific term.
craigers (anonymous) says…
Don't label it Christian like justice. You have no idea what a Christian is so don't act like you do. You are merely throwing garbage up with a stereotype smokescreen. Haven't we realized the problem with stereotypes a long time ago? The point is that the developing baby is a person and is an innocent person that doesn't deserve to die, no matter how it got there. My point is that people try to label babies with different names in order to remove feelings from the situation. You wouldn't just kill another human being, but by labeling it a fetus, it makes it doable.
smitty (anonymous) says…
No it doesn't reduce the fetus to parasite. Kline's statement keeps the woman as chattel. A warm, breathing incubator for the fetus's developement.
Science and technology has allowed us to know the gender of the fetus, to even do medical procedures on the fetus, to incubate a premature birth until the fetus can develope enough to survive out side the mechanical womb of a hospital. All quite wonderous. Science has allowed us to do some things that only a mother,s womb and/or a precieved god could once do. We're confused and haven't worked it out yet.
Lepanto1571 (anonymous) says…
Clothes hanger abortions?
Oh, I get it, keep it legal because it's going to happen anyway. Good thing we don't use that genius logic with murder, rape, extortion, or armed robbery.
I'd be happy to see some empirical data on the number of "back-alley" or "clothes hanger abortions" that were committed per annum prior to Roe v. Wade. Oh, I forgot they don't exist, we should just take pro-aborts word for it, I guess. "Back-alley" or "clothes hanger" abortions is a catchy jingle though.
One thing's for sure, if it were illegal, it'd be a hell of a lot rarer.
Lepanto1571 (anonymous) says…
I guess ReachAround's facts are as few as his/her responses. The challenge is made. The chance of acceptance seems remote.
Clothes hangers and back-alleys!! Oh, Oh!! No!!
Sounds like the drama of my four year old.