It was only a matter of time before I elicited much heated reaction to my column I published quietly on my main website the other day without advertising on the blog. I've collected a few e-mails to share with my readers and will continue to do so as they trickle in.
Delta9 writes:
The issue I take with your article is that you assume that if abortion were illegal than (sic) the incidence of pre-marital sex will decline. Do you actually believe abortion is responsible for irresponsible sex?Not necessarily, though I did write, "an aged 18-34 single male may sound noble and proudly forthright when he says abortion is a "woman's choice" and a decision for her to make, but if such an option were not available he'd have to think twice about jumping on anything with two legs and a skirt."
The point of the article was not to (completely) condemn acts of random sex but to imply that the availability of abortion has cheapened what is fantasized in all those romance novels; that sex is an act of love. Columnist Dorinda Bordlee, whom I quoted in the article, makes perfect sense when she says women have gotten the raw end of the deal.
Toby isn't too happy:
Your ignorant rant is bullsh*t. So what, married couples who have sex for purposes other than to procreate are contributing to the downfalls of society. Take your religious right-wing nonsense and f*ck off.Okay, but how you imply that I'm a religious right-winger escapes me. Oh that's right, you have to be a militant Christian Jesus-freak and a conservative to believe in the sanctity of life. But on your initial reaction, I never said there was anything wrong with sex; married or not. What I did say however was the vehicle for fetal termination allows for risk-free sex, when you save for sexually transmitted diseases, and because of it more unwanted pregnancies result.
By far the vast majority of unwanted and thus aborted pregnancies stem from underage, non-married couples for reasons too obvious for me to have to print in this space.
0 comments:
Post a Comment