Trying to end another scourge

Trying to end another scourge

William Wilberforce, a member of the English Parliament in the 18th century, fighting against economic interests, introduced bill after bill in Parliament until finally, after 20 long years, he succeeded in ending the slave trade. He battled another 20 years to end slavery altogether in the British Empire.

In our own land there is an evil that currently exists, and with the approval of our federal government: abortion. Since abortion was determined to be a constitutional right, over 50 million babies have been slaughtered in their mothers’ wombs. A womb was meant to be a place of protection and safety for the yet-to-be-born baby to grow and develop. It is now one of the most dangerous places to be.

The claim is made that abortion is just a surgical procedure. However, just a few inches difference in location and the same act would be considered first degree murder in any court in the land. The argument is made that a woman has the right to the privacy of her own body, but that fetus is not her body. Every person’s DNA is distinctly different from everyone else’s. People have been convicted or acquitted of crimes based on whether their DNA matched that at the crime scene. Therefore the difference between the DNA of a woman and that of her baby proves that the fetus is a developing different human being. A one-year old is just as much a person as a thirty-year old. He just has not developed into his full potential yet. Similarly, an unborn baby is a person with a potential yet to be developed into maturity.

I am absolutely against violence directed against abortion clinics or the doctors who perform them. My anger is directed against the legalization of what common sense tells us is murder. Every day 3,300 of our future citizens are murdered. Just as Wilberforce never stopped trying to end the slave trade, so we should not stop our efforts to end the legal murder of the most helpless of all human beings.

I believe that a woman has the right to have as many or as few children as she wishes. But if she becomes pregnant, she may not kill that baby because she does not want it. My heart goes out to the women who find themselves in an unwanted pregnancy. Let us help them through that pregnancy. If they do not want that baby or are unable to care for it, let us encourage couples who have the emotional and financial capacity to do so to adopt them. But let us not kill the baby who through no fault of its own was brought into this world.

Lawrence Cavicchi, Youngstown

Yes on Issue 2 is a vote for change

In Marc Kovac’s Oct. 15 column was titled, “Voters still confused over issue 2.” This was based on a speech given at the University of Mount Union. I must agree with Mr. Kovac, Senate Bill 5 and the November ballot Issue 2 concerning it, are confusing. There have been several good articles in The Vindicator explaining it over the last several months, but it needs to be put into simple language.

A yes vote in November means that you are for SB 5 and that we need a change.

A no vote in November means that you want to eliminate SB 5 and that you are happy with the way things are.

I am not happy with the way things are.

It’s a shame that we need to decide between the public unions and the taxpayers, but as a taxpayer, I must side with them.

We need more accountability from the public unions and SB 5 gives us that.

Donald Butler, Warren