Response missed its own point

One portion of the reply by Mark J. Schumaker to my recent Fence Post item on abortion and contraception merits comment, because it perpetuates the very misconception being addressed. Mr. Schumaker condemns both abortion and contraception, but he acknowledges quite eloquently the fundamental difference between them when he says: “There is a difference between preventing ovulation or fertilization and destroying the life present in a fertilized egg or embryo.”

This is exactly the crucial point. Contraception by definition prevents conception. Thus, it is certainly incorrect to call the Plan B pill or an IUD a contraceptive. Lumping both abortion and contraception together as “birth control” is a convenient way to promote a position, but this does not recognize the very significant difference between them.

The other polemics in Mr. Schumaker’s reply about interfering with “nature” can stand or fall on their own merits, or lack thereof. However, the point should be made that we interfere with nature every day with countless medical procedures that influence health, happiness, life and death. I doubt many would advocate we abandon these to avoid offending natural progression.

It seems only when sex is involved that such concerns surface. Queen Victoria would be so proud.

Paul Herman

Libertyville