Woman's abortion not for writer to decide

I read Tim Schmidgall's Jan. 30 Fence Post in the Daily Herald titled "There are worse things than abortion."

I can't believe Mr. Schmidgall has the audacity to superimpose his abortion beliefs in a teen mother's cash flow problem and omnisciently decide that this mother should have had an abortion.

When he says the mother and others like her "clearly doesn't need the child" he exhibits his cavalier throwaway life attitude. Hunger and malnutrition can be reversed; abortion is not reversible. I'm glad Mr. Schmidgall's mother had more resources when he was born than the teen mother he wrote about that was trying to keep her baby alive.

It appears Mr. Schmidgall is also "worrying about the unborn" by suggesting his values should have prevailed in this situation. I'm guessing he believes he is more concerned about the existing "unfortunates" of the world than Mr. Rudney.

Is it impossible for Mr. Rudney to be concerned about both, those who are still in the womb as well as the existing unfortunate of the world. The least Mr. Schmidgall could do is now put this infant in the "countless millions roaming around this planet already" category he is presumably concerned about.

Ernie Miller

Elgin