Dear editor,
I am writing to discuss my view on the Value Them Both Amendment. I am voting “Yes” for the amendment. I will discuss part of the reason why in the letter. I have very many different reasons to vote the way I do, including religion and moral beliefs, but as those do not pertain to all of your readers, I thought I would stick to just science and logic for this letter.
The Value Them Both Amendment will put the laws back to how they were before the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that there was a right for a woman to have an abortion in Kansas in 2019. Since that time they have overturned the ruling that banned live dismemberment abortion and the clinic safety, sanitation, and inspection law. If you would like to see a video or photos of a dismemberment abortion you can visit abortionno.org.
Going back to the old restrictions would not be a complete ban on abortion. It does allow for the possibility of a complete ban if that would ever be voted on, but that is not currently the case. The old restrictions include no abortions past 22 weeks, unless the pregnancy would seriously compromise the life of the mother. I do not think that is an unreasonable request. Babies have been successfully saved at 21 weeks gestation, so at the same gestational age that some doctors are racing to save infants, others are literally tearing them to pieces.
If we were to look up when life begins on the internet or in a science book, it would list the time as the moment of fertilization, not when the infant starts breathing outside of the womb. I have noticed many women who are pro-abortion saying it is their body, and therefore, their right to have an abortion, but, technically, it is not their body. The fetus is already its own separate human being. If you argue that it is completely dependent upon the mother, and therefore, can be aborted, I would like to point out a few other cases. I currently have a one-year old. He is completely dependent upon me for survival. If I left him completely on his own he would slowly (or quickly if he did something foolish) die. Do I have a right to kill him if I decide to? If my husband were to get in a car wreck and become a quadriplegic who is completely dependent upon my care, do I have a right to kill him? If my older relative gets dementia and is completely dependent upon me for their care, do I have a right to kill them? I would guarantee that a sane, logical person would, and should, say “no”. Those would all be cases of murder. How is it different for this scientifically proven separate human being that is in utero to be killed? Did you know that if you take your dog or cat in to be spayed and they find out it is pregnant, even just early stages, they will not go through with the procedure. The animal will be allowed to deliver its babies before the procedure is allowed. We are currently placing a higher value on animal lives over human lives.
I find I have so much else that I want to write, but I realize these letters are not usually that long, so I will stop with the brief points I have made. I strongly hope that people actually look into what this amendment will or will not do. Just a side note, when googling the Value Them Both Amendment, I literally had to scroll a whole page before I came upon a pro-life site explaining the amendment. The previous 15-20 sites listed were all funded by pro-abortion entities. Please carefully consider your vote.
Thank you,
Katrina Springer,
Iola, Kan.
