Home Commentary Letters to the Editor, September 7, 2022

Letters to the Editor, September 7, 2022


Speak Up about Abortion

To the Editor:

On June 24, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion. This gives lawmakers here in Vermont permission to ban abortion. All women deserve the right to make decisions about their own bodies and lives and to receive support and assistance in making such hard decisions.

Lawmakers and Supreme Court justices who voted for, or are in support of the overturn of Roe v. Wade have placed a dwelling feeling of fear and trepidation on all women. Abortion stigma used to keep us silent, but now is the time to talk about abortion loudly and proudly. Speak up about your abortion, why you supported your loved one getting an abortion, or how you realized abortion rights are important to you. This decision will affect people now and people in future generations who will live in our small central Vermont towns. Future daughters, mothers, sisters, and all women are counting on us to provide support, resources, and access to safe abortions so that all women can feel safe and supported with their choice. Help us by guiding future Vermont state lawmakers to ensure women’s rights in Vermont stay protected. Join local rallies, keep yourself educated about what’s going on in our state, and help to educate others. If you or a loved one is seeking support with such a decision, call the Vermont national helpline at (802) 371-0102. If you are seeking an abortion, visit plannedparenthood.org to find the closest Planned Parenthood near you. 

Naomi Myers, Moretown

Late Term Abortion and Act 47

To the Editor:

Current Vermont law does not recognize the viability of the fetus at any stage of pregnancy.

Proposal 5 will continue this legal reasoning as an amendment to our state constitution. It was never the intent of the Supreme Court under Warren Burger to categorically deny the status of human life to a fetus at any and all stages of pregnancy.

Act 47 and Proposal 5 are not consistent with the decision handed out in Roe v. Wade. The Warren Burger Court stated “some amici argue that the woman’s right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses. With this we do not agree.” They also said “the privacy right involved, therefore, cannot be said to be absolute.”

It is not consistent with the majority of legal precedents and laws in this country. We live in a country where prostitution, polygamy, and suicide are illegal almost everywhere.

There is no such thing as an absolute right. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to slander; freedom of religion does not give you the right to sacrifice (even consensually) the life of a human being.

Never has a civil right trespassed against a human right except in cases of national security. At later stages of development, the viability of the human fetus cannot be denied.

I don’t know a single woman who actually believes late-term abortions are necessary for their equality or empowerment. I cannot support Act 47 as written and will vote against the upcoming amendment.

Dan Renfro, Montpelier 

Editor’s Note: A 2019 VTDigger fact-check (vtdigger.org/2019/02/15/vermonts-proposed-law-allow-abortions-right-moment-birth/)  found claims about late-term abortions in Vermont “right up to the moment of birth” to be “Mostly False.” The most current CDC data (from 2019) show that less than 1% of abortions were performed in Vermont later than 21 weeks gestation (this number mirrors national statistics also reported by the CDC). And the “last minute,” “late-term” abortions feared by opponents of Act 47 do not occur in most places, including Vermont, according to the data available.

History Repeats

To the Editor:

Is history on the verge of repeating a major tragedy? Is there experience that helps us to understand Trump? Take a look at William Shirer’s “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” … no, not all 1,143 pages! Are certain patterns and strategies being repeated today? Constant lies, creating crises to achieve one’s own ends (is Jan. 6 Trump’s version of the Reichstag Fire)? Dishonestly attacking the basic institutions and procedures such as the voting process (the votes in Georgia, Arizona, and many other states)? Attacking law enforcement when it is doing its job? The list is long, and many states seem to be on board 100% with Trump’s anti-democratic methods. One major party is totally in Trump’s pocket and serves only one person. Shirer’s narrative is alarming as we watch today’s Republican party … read pages 195–204. Is this being repeated?

Rob Boucher, Montpelier