What has our society come to when a dog's life is considered more valuable than an unborn child?
letter of the day: abortion argument
I couldn't help contrasting the two letters next to each other in the Belfast Telegraph (Write Back, July 27) - one wanting abortion rights for Northern Ireland and the other wanting to spare a dog.
On the one hand, there are thousands pressing for the dog to live. And, on the other, there are those pressing for the right to kill unborn babies.
It makes me wonder about our society when a dog's life is more valuable than that of a human being, for, with advances in science, we now know much more about the unborn (when their heart starts beating, when they can feel pain, when they can respond to stimuli) and they are no longer the "blobs of cells" we were told they were in the early days after the 1967 Abortion Act was passed.
More than eight million babies have been aborted since 1967, mostly for social reasons (many more than mentioned in the Iraq war), with a large percentage being repeat abortions.
One girl of 16 had had four abortions, according to one article.
If a dog's life is worth fighting for, surely the life of an unborn child is much more so? And, by the way, doctors have admitted that there is no such medical term as "fatal foetal abnormality". They have also been found to be wrong and some such diagnosed babies have been born normal.
Your correspondent refers to babies always having been killed. This is true, as both Greeks and Romans exposed unwanted babies to die either by wild animals, or by the elements.
The Christianity he/she despises was the agent of change, as babies began to be seen as made in the image of God and, therefore, precious and worth saving.
So, it is not surprising that, as Christianity is pushed to the margins of our society, the preciousness of life at both beginning and end is being reduced to whether or not it suits the individual to look after it.
Tandragee, Co Armagh