Letter to the Editor

[DPDarkPrimus]

I'm writing a letter to the editor. Here's the letter I'm responding to.

It is hard to believe people who call themselves good God-fearing Christians would support a candidate for governor like Chet Culver.

He says he stands for a woman's right to choose. Why doesn't he just say he supports abortion? That's what the court-invented, so-called right is. Is he afraid to use the word abortion for fear people will figure out what he really stands for?

More than 3,600 innocent babies are murdered each day in this country. THat is 151 per hour or at least one every 24 seconds. Planned Parenthood backs Chet Culver because he is telling them by supporting a woman's rights it's OK to murder babies.

Wake up people, abortion is murder and it's not a pretty sight to see. People don't want to see the gory abortion pictures, but until people look at them and realize what abortion really does to a body, it will not stop.

And my response:

The writer of the July 30th letter saying not to support Chet Culver because of his views on abortion said a few things I think need some clarification.

“People who call themselves good God-fearing Christians…”
If you’re a good Christian, why would you need to be fear god? It seems to me that only those who’ve got something to be worried about should be afraid.

“He says he stands for a woman’s right to choose. Why doesn’t he just say he supports abortion?”
You say you’re pro-life. Why don’t you just say you’re anti-choice? It’s ridiculous to claim someone “supports abortion”- no, they support the right to have the option to have an abortion. I dare you to find someone who is “pro-abortion”- and hence, “anti-birth”.

“More than 3,600 innocent babies are murdered each day in this country.”
Oh really? Please define what you mean by “babies”. I’ll address this further in a moment.

“Wake up people, abortion is murder and it’s not a pretty sight to see. People don’t want to see the gory abortion photos…”
More than 95% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy, when there is little more than a cluster of cells, not even technically a fetus. The photos of third trimester abortions that the pro-life movement loves to flaunt are the rarest of all abortions.

Now, on to the topic of “murder”… is it seriously being argued that a spheroid of a few thousand cells is a human individual deserving equal rights as the person those cells are inside? Should we charge the mother with involuntary manslaughter if she miscarries, then?
Once brain activity starts within a fetus (approximately 12-13 weeks), then it’s an individual, and abortion should not be allowed- but before then, don’t pretend it’s something it’s not.

Suggestions? Please keep in mind I have a 300-word limit, and I'm at precisely 300 words as is.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Revision 1

The writer of the July 30th letter saying not to support Chet Culver because of his views on abortion said a few things I think need some clarification.

“People who call themselves good God-fearing Christians…”
If you’re a good Christian, why would you need to fear god? It seems to me that only those who’ve got something to be worried about should be afraid.

“He says he stands for a woman’s right to choose. Why doesn’t he just say he supports abortion?”
Why don’t you just say you’re anti-choice? It’s ridiculous to claim someone “supports abortion”- no, they support the right to have the OPTION to have an abortion. I dare you to find someone who is “pro-abortion”- and hence, “anti-birth”.

“More than 3,600 innocent babies are murdered each day in this country.”
Oh really? Please define what you mean by “babies”. You certainly can’t be referring to zygotes, could you?

“Wake up people, abortion is murder and it’s not a pretty sight to see. People don’t want to see the gory abortion photos…”
More than 95% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy, when there is little more than a cluster of cells, not even technically a fetus. (Source: abortionfacts.com) The photos of third trimester abortions that the pro-life movement loves to flaunt are the rarest of all abortions.

Now, on to the topic of “murder”… is it seriously being argued that a spheroid of a few thousand cells is a human individual deserving equal rights as the person those cells are inside? Should we charge the mother with involuntary manslaughter if she miscarries, then?
Once brain activity starts within a fetus (approximately 12-13 weeks), then it’s an individual, and abortion should not be allowed- but before then, don’t pretend it’s something it’s not.

[Admiral Johnason]

3,600 abortions a day sounds a little too high. When you account for the birth rate of around 6,000, then that means that nearly 1/3 of all embryos are aborted. That can't be true.

[DPDarkPrimus]

3,600 abortions a day sounds a little too high. When you account for the birth rate of around 6,000, then that means that nearly 1/3 of all embryos are aborted. That can't be true.

If I had more space, I could address that. abortionfacts.com is a great non-biased site with all the statistics people need to see she's full of shit. Since I source it, I don't feel so bad about not being able to address it.

[Darth Wong]

Most anti-abortion activists (by which I mean those who would support abortion only in cases of rape or incest or threat to the mother's health) are lying when they say they value a fetus the same way they value a baby. Nobody would even think of killing a baby just because it was conceived through rape or incest, yet the majority of Americans would abort a one month old fetus, thus proving that despite their rhetoric, they know perfectly well that a clump of cells is not the same thing as a baby. Even in the case of risk to a mother's health, who among us would kill a baby if its survival posed a risk to a woman's health somehow? Most people who say they put the same value on a fetus as a baby are lying.

[Spacebeard]

Personally, I would remove the jab at the phrase "God-fearing": it has nothing to do with the argument and it would likely be viewed as too inflammatory. I might also point out that proponents of reproductive freedom tend to support contraception and sex education, measures that would decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus the number of abortions, while the "pro-life" camp generally opposes them.

[Darth Wong]

I love the argument that the unpleasantness of abortion photos is proof that the procedure is immoral. What the fuck kind of invasive surgical procedure does not look unpleasant?

[DPDarkPrimus]

Personally, I would remove the jab at the phrase "God-fearing": it has nothing to do with the argument and it would likely be viewed as too inflammatory. I might also point out that proponents of reproductive freedom tend to support contraception and sex education, measures that would decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus the number of abortions, while the "pro-life" camp generally opposes them.

Ah, but can you fit that into the 36 words that removing the "God fearing" bit allows for me? Remember, I've got a length restriction.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Most anti-abortion activists (by which I mean those who would support abortion only in cases of rape or incest or threat to the mother's health) are lying when they say they value a fetus the same way they value a baby. Nobody would even think of killing a baby just because it was conceived through rape or incest, yet the majority of Americans would abort a one month old fetus, thus proving that despite their rhetoric, they know perfectly well that a clump of cells is not the same thing as a baby. Even in the case of risk to a mother's health, who among us would kill a baby if its survival posed a risk to a woman's health somehow? Most people who say they put the same value on a fetus as a baby are lying.

Which is why I ask just what she means by "babies".

[DPDarkPrimus]

Revision 2

The writer of the July 30th letter saying not to support Chet Culver because of his views on abortion said a few things I think need some clarification.

“He says he stands for a woman’s right to choose. Why doesn’t he just say he supports abortion?”
Why don’t you just say you’re anti-choice? It’s ridiculous to claim someone “supports abortion”- no, they support the right to have the OPTION to have an abortion. I dare you to find someone who is “pro-abortion”.

It’s ironic that those opposed to abortion are also usually opposed to educating people about safe-sex and providing easy access to birth control as well.

“More than 3,600 innocent babies are murdered each day in this country.”
Oh really? Please define what you mean by “babies”. I think you mean to say “zygote”, or “fetus”.

“Wake up people, abortion is murder and it’s not a pretty sight to see. People don’t want to see the gory abortion photos…”
More than 95% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy, when there is little more than a cluster of cells, not even technically a fetus. (Source: abortionfacts.com) The photos of third trimester abortions that the pro-life movement loves to flaunt are the rarest of all abortions- and it’s a surgery procedure, of course it will be gory.

Now, on to the topic of “murder”… is it seriously being argued that a spheroid of a few thousand cells is a human individual deserving equal rights as the person those cells are inside? Should we charge the mother with involuntary manslaughter if she miscarries, then?
Once brain activity starts within a fetus (approximately 12-13 weeks), then it’s an individual, and abortion should not be allowed- but before then, don’t pretend it’s something it’s not.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Should read "someone, anyone, who is "pro-abortion"".

[DPDarkPrimus]

Also:

More than 95% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy, when there is little more than a cluster of cells, not even technically a fetus. (Source: abortionfacts.com)

Changed to:

More than 95% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy. Third-trimester abortions are less than .05%. (Source: abortionfacts.com)

[Darth Wong]

Instead of including the other person's sentences, like so:

"Why is ... <blah blah blah>"
Rebuttal

I would think that it would be better to go with:

Patricia Cook wrote that "<blah blah blah". Rebuttal.

The way it's constructed, it looks like you're trying to emulate the style of posting on a bulletin board, and letters to the editor generally don't look like that.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Instead of including the other person's sentences, like so:

"Why is ... <blah blah blah>"
Rebuttal

I would think that it would be better to go with:

Patricia Cook wrote that "<blah blah blah". Rebuttal.

The way it's constructed, it looks like you're trying to emulate the style of posting on a bulletin board, and letters to the editor generally don't look like that.

I've included the names of the individuals before, and when my letters were published, they were edited to "the author" or "the writer".


Revision 3

The writer of the July 30th letter saying not to support Chet Culver because of his views on abortion said a few things I think need some clarification.

“He says he stands for a woman’s right to choose. Why doesn’t he just say he supports abortion?”
Why don’t you just say you’re anti-choice? It’s ridiculous to claim someone “supports abortion”- no, they support the right to have the OPTION to have an abortion. I dare you to find someone, anyone, who is “pro-abortion”.

It’s ironic that those opposed to abortion are also usually opposed to educating people about safe-sex and providing easy access to birth control. They oppose measures to reduce unwanted pregnancies, then want to force them to term.

“More than 3,600 innocent babies are murdered each day in this country.”
Oh really? Please define what you mean by “babies”. I think you mean to say “zygote”, or “fetus”.

“Wake up people, abortion is murder and it’s not a pretty sight to see. People don’t want to see the gory abortion photos…”
More than 95% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy. Third-trimester abortions are less than .05%. (Source: abortionfacts.com) The photos of third trimester abortions the author refers to are a surgical procedure- of course there is gore. What was the authors' point of mentioning this obvious fact?

Now, on to the topic of “murder”… is it seriously being argued that a spheroid of a few thousand cells is a human individual deserving equal rights as the person those cells are inside? Should we charge the mother with involuntary manslaughter if she miscarries, then?
Once brain activity starts within a fetus (approximately 12-13 weeks), then it’s an individual, and abortion should not be allowed- but before then, don’t pretend it’s something it’s not.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Oh wait, I understand what you mean. Here, I revised it so it's less like a post... I think.

Revision 3.5

The writer of the July 30th letter saying not to support Chet Culver because of his views on abortion said a few things I think need some clarification.

“He says he stands for a woman’s right to choose. Why doesn’t he just say he supports abortion?”
Why doesn’t the writer just say they’re anti-choice? It’s ridiculous to claim someone “supports abortion”- no, they support the right to have the OPTION to have an abortion. I challenge them to find someone, anyone, who is “pro-abortion”.

It’s ironic that those opposed to abortion are also usually opposed to educating people about safe-sex and providing easy access to birth control. They oppose measures to reduce unwanted pregnancies, then want to force them to term.

“More than 3,600 innocent babies are murdered each day in this country.”
Could the author define what they meant by “babies”. I think they mean “zygote”, or “fetus”.

“Wake up people, abortion is murder and it’s not a pretty sight to see. People don’t want to see the gory abortion photos…”
More than 95% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester of pregnancy. Third-trimester abortions are less than .05%. (Source: abortionfacts.com) The photos of third trimester abortions the author refers to are a surgical procedure- of course there is gore. What was the authors' point of mentioning this obvious fact?

Now, on to the topic of “murder”… is it seriously being argued that a spheroid of a few thousand cells is a human individual deserving equal rights as the person those cells are inside? Should we charge the mother with involuntary manslaughter if she miscarries, then?
Once brain activity starts within a fetus (approximately 12-13 weeks), then it’s an individual, and abortion should not be allowed- but before then, let’s not pretend it’s something it isn’t.

[Patrick Degan]

Always remember that a letter to a newspaper has to be concise. Anything that cannot withstand the editing process will not be published. Most rebuttal letters are usually never published except if the controversy is perceived to generate reader interest. The best approach to rebutting an idiot is to make your letter, to paraphrase Hobbes, nasty, brutal, and short. But always with style.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Always remember that a letter to a newspaper has to be concise. Anything that cannot withstand the editing process will not be published. Most rebuttal letters are usually never published except if the controversy is perceived to generate reader interest. The best approach to rebutting an idiot is to make your letter, to paraphrase Hobbes, nasty, brutal, and short. But always with style.

You mean to say I'm not doing that now?

All my letters have been rebuttals. The local newspaper is really good about representing both sides of an issue in the editorials.

[Surlethe]

If I were you, I would simply go with something along the lines of,

Dear Editor:

Ms Patricia Cooke believes that abortion is murder, and that, therefore, an embryo's life (since more than 95% of abortions are performed in the first trimester [source: abortionfacts.com]) is equivalent to that of a child. I wonder, though -- if she were in a hospital on fire, and could only take one, would she take a five-year-old child or five petri dishes containing embryos?

Sincerely,

DPDarkPrimus

A point-by-point rebuttal just looks really clunky in the format of a letter to the editor. It feels like you're expecting a response from her, when the exchange will, in all probability, not go beyond your letter. A letter to the editor isn't really the place for a drawn-out debate; if you're going to contest someone's point, it's best to cut efficiently to the cruxt of her claim and demolish it as swiftly as possible, and I think the point-by-point method just isn't the best way of doing that.

PS- Feel free to use anything from the "letter" I wrote, but the analogy's not mine; Darth Wong used it in a thread a few months back.

EDIT: This post was not edited, and certainly not in response to Alerik the Fortunate's post below.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Hmm. I'll look into making it more concise.... tomorrow.

[Exonerate]

Get rid of the quote/response format. It might work on a forum, but not in a newspaper. Your best bet of making an impression on your audience is to keep the letter short and to the point, without presenting tons of evidence for your argument like we do here. It might not be very thorough, but reiterating a single point for some reason seems to be more effective for convincing people. Case in point: During the presidential debate Kerry had a elaborate and well-put response to a question of whether tax dollars would go towards funding abortions. Almost everybody was either too lazy or stupid to grasp the meaning of what he said.

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Concerning Surlethe's suggested letter, I would still retain some reference to your fact source abortionfacts.com, to reinforce your credibility, and to direct someone in the rare event that someone, anyone who reads your letter, should be inclined to do any independent research.

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Or perhaps I'm an overprincipled optimist.

[thejester]

I'll jump on the no point-by-point rebuttal bandwagon. I'd say something like 'In her letter of July 30th, Patricia Cook argued blah blah blah, yet this blah blah blah. Her comment "......."' etc. Looks smoother, more coherent, and less inflammatory (editors would probably go in for the polite aspect).