SOMETIMES I despair of the gullibility of not only the general public but also the UK media and UK politicians. The current accepted orthodoxy appears to be anything Trump bad and anything Clinton/Democrat good.
A recent speech by Chelsea Clinton, Bill and Hillary's daughter who is being groomed as the next generation of Clintons to seize power, must surely open people's eyes to the crass cynicism of the Democrats. In a speech Chelsea claimed that the 1973 Roe v Wade Supreme Court decision, which legalised abortion, was too valuable to the United States economy to revoke because it is helping make Americans rich. The event at which she spoke was a "Rise up for Roe" event which was co-sponsored by Planned Parenthood and unbelievably her argument for abortion was a financial one. To quote her: “It is not a disconnected fact … that American women entering the labour force from 1973 to 2009 added three and a half trillion dollars to our economy. Right?” Chelsea asked the stunned audience. “The net [from the] new entrance of women? That is not disconnected from the fact that Roe became the law of the land in January of 1973. Thus, no matter what other things Americans may care about, everyone should appreciate the economic value of legalised abortion.”
Individuals unquestionably have differing opinions both pro and anti-abortion. Some are religious objections, some are moral and some are about freedom of the individual. However I have never heard anyone sink so low as to justify the ending of life on an economic argument. There is a horrible parallel with those in the 19th century who delayed the abolition of slavery due to its economic effects on the UK.
So perhaps before you blindly jump on the we hate Trump bandwagon you should consider the alternative.
David Stubley,
22 Templeton Crescent, Prestwick.
MEDICAL science strains all its sinews to prolong life. Indeed, it is now possible for premature babies to be viable at a much earlier age than we used to think possible and this time scale will contract with more medical advances.
Yet several professional medical bodies are going to campaign to relax our abortion law to allow later terminations.
This is not only ironic but cruelly farcical.
What then is the difference between abortion and infanticide?The width of the womb wall.
If an abortion takes place, the being aborted is referred to as a foetus. If the same being is safely delivered at the same stage, it is referred to as a premature baby.
How do we reconcile this difference of vocabulary with our conscience? Or is the difference intended to assuage our guilt? Who could love a foetus? Who could not love a baby? Yet a rose by any other name smells just as sweet.
Denis Bruce,
5 Rannoch Gardens, Bishopbriggs.
YOU are meticulous in following your house-style rules, down to the number of asterisks you assign to each dirty word. Can I suggest the term "Pro-life" should be given inverted commas when it refers to a group of anti-abortion campaigners ("Pro-life group loses fight to stop home abortion drug being prescribed", The Herald, August 16)? I'm very much pro-life, even though I don't often agree with them, and I daresay that goes for lots of us.
The same applies to the word "humanist", which has been similarly hijacked by a group of campaigners against religion. Erasmus and his modern successors would be very surprised to be called atheists.
Martin Axford,
18 Bonar Crescent, Bridge of Weir.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel