Religion shouldn't control abortion

I think I know why I've not seen a response to my question: If a few cells equals a whole human being, why isn't the anti-choice crowd out picketing every fertility clinic in the nation? (These clinics cull and discard unused fertilized eggs.)

Rather, anti-choice Fencepost letters just keep repeating the writer's personal, religious-based arguments for totally banning abortion.

Recently, an internet edition of the L.A. Times reported on efforts in Colorado (and, I understand, a few other states) to pass a law extending "personhood" to fertilized eggs.

The Times quoted Brian Rohrbough, a former president of Colorado Right to Life, saying "The logical thing is to start with personhood. It's the only legitimate tactic that does not involve a compromise."

So here we have it. Don't talk about the ramifications of treating a fertilized egg as a whole human being and you don't have to reveal your true agenda.

There is strong, healthy, and ongoing debate about when life as a human being begins and ends. End-of-life definitions involve organ system function (or lack thereof), including non-reflexive brain functions.

How would this relate to the "personhood" of a fertilized egg? Would that mean we'd all risk dying like Terry Schiavo because brain function no longer counts? Would a frozen fertilized egg in a fertility clinic qualify for government assistance and AFDC? What happens to the availability of birth control?

Pregnancy demands serious preparation and respect for its potential, but people disagree on abortion -- as do whole religious denominations.

When someone is fanatically determined to make his/her religious view prevail at the expense of mine, I believe that is rightly called anti-choice.

Our Constitution was written to prevent any one religion being imposed on our nation. It has served us well and should stay that way.

Barbara Muehlhausen

Schaumburg