Choose adoption, reject abortion

The unfortunate establishment of a Planned Parenthood facility in Aurora provides still another place where the lives of innocent unborn children can be quickly and quietly terminated.

Some would argue that these are not really "persons" whose lives are being terminated.

Given today's technology, how can any thinking person possibly buy into that line of thinking?

While it is true that the unborn infant progresses through various developmental stages, there is absolutely no question that we are dealing with a living, evolving human life throughout the process.

Does not this human life deserve the same protections we provide for it after it leaves a woman's womb?

If not, why not?

How can abortion be a legally protected practice?

Further, how does one's right to privacy give one the right to abort a living human life?

We all know that society, and the law do not permit the deliberate ending of an infant's life once it leaves the mother's womb, or in some instances, even earlier.

Indeed, there is outrage across the system whenever news reaches the public about a mother who has taken the life of her child shortly after birth.

Why is it morally and legally unacceptable to terminate a life after it leaves the womb, but acceptable while the life is still in the woman's womb?

Isn't it the same life we're talking about?

I am among those who absolutely abhor the early practice of back-alley abortions. And my heart goes out to any woman and family who for whatever reason are confronted with this issue in their personal lives.

But surely abortion cannot be our response to an unwanted child.

Surely we are capable of a more compassionate and moral response to the issue of unwanted children.

Adoption is the solution, not abortion.

Frank R. Ardito Sr.

Huntley