In response to the opinion article Abortion is Murder (Dec. 7), I must respectfully disagree with the writer. The entire argument that abortion is murder rests upon the assumption that a fetus is a living human being, an argument that simply does not hold up under heavy scrutiny. A fetus cannot fully function on its own and cannot perform basic bodily functions without the help of a “host”, its mother. Comparing fetuses to children is a gross exaggeration, and is entirely based on the presumption that a child’s place in the world is determined at conception.
Contrary to Mr. Rajagopalan’s beliefs, however, is the fact that a fetus’s DNA does not determine its future. While “Thomas” may have become a master violinist, liked the humanities and hated math, none of these qualities would have come about as the result of his DNA. Thomas’ mental development and even some of his physical development would have almost entirely been the product of his experiences and choices throughout his childhood. Though Thomas’s DNA could have determined that he would grow to be seven feet tall, he would never become a star basketball player without years of practice and a commitment to excel. Only through years of training could Thomas have become a musical maestro. Only through his love of learning, a quality gained through one’s experiences both in and out of the classroom and not through one’s parents’ genetics, could Thomas have learned to appreciate history or philosophy. I do not love economics because my father loves economics, but because I have been exposed to economic reasoning throughout my life. Both of my parents are liberal, and yet I am a libertarian—did my parents pass on to me libertarian genes? Of course not! My education has given me the ability to reason, and my reasoning has led me to my current set of political beliefs. It is my education, reasoning, and experiences in life, and not my DNA, that make me who I am today. To say that a person’s life is predetermined by their parent’s genetic makeup is to ignore the immeasurable effects of a person’s experiences.
Mr. Rajagopalan’s entire thesis is based upon the presumption that a fetus has the same developmental capabilities as a child. However, a fetus’s development is entirely physical. A child can learn through its experiences and develop specific qualities such as determination, courage or intelligence—it thus develops mentally as well as physically. But a fetus cannot do this, simply because it has no experiences. Humans are distinguished by their ability to reason and develop mentally throughout their lives. A fetus cannot do this until it is born, and thus cannot be considered a living human being.
Daniel Hartsoe ’09
To the Editor
Thomas Smith never played the violin because his parents did not care enough about his well-being to buy him lessons, let alone a violin. Because Thomas Smith was an unwanted child.
Would you force a woman to carry the child of a rape? To raise that child? To give that child a life of misery in an orphanage, never to have a home of its own? Would you force a woman to carry a child so deformed that it could never breathe or think on its own? Would you force society to pay for the care of a child who would never be a member of society and never know what was happening in the world around him? Would you entrust the raising of a child to a girl who could not manage her own life, let alone her child’s?
Abortion, for those who choose it, allows women to live their own lives and put no burden on others. It is not only the legal right of women, but a way to give them control over their own bodies and their own futures. Even though the South Carolina government holds that a fetus is subject to child abuse laws, its courts cannot contradict the supreme law of the land – the ruling of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade – legalized abortion.
Shoshana Hereld ’09
Ecology Over Golf
To the Editor:
I wish to commend Mr. Kohler and the Board of Trustees on their recent decision to reject the construction of a multi-million dollar “destination” golf course on the Choate campus. The proposed course would have been imprudent in many respects, most importantly in its potential harm to acres of pristine open space and the likelihood for destruction of unspoiled wildlife habitat. The Board’s decision represents a fiscal and ethical victory, and it is my hope that the community will seize upon this choice to continue to make steps towards a more comprehensive environmental education for Choate students.
The Board’s consideration of an ecology program would put Choate at the forefront of its peer schools, and enhance the school’s recently reinvigorated environmental image. Such a program at Choate would serve as a model for other schools, spreading the message that environmental literacy is of paramount importance. Moreover, an ecology program would address our world’s most precious–and most threatened–resource, the environment. In a day where children grow up thinking that beef comes carefully shrink-wrapped and packaged for the grocery store shelf, an ecology program would help bridge the disconnect between our food source and its consumers. Most importantly, an ecology program would inspire students to become informed advocates for environmental preservation at a time when it is needed most.
