Northwest Voices | Letters to the Editor
Abortion debate should be dogma-free
Hickey falls into the dogma trap
The bald disingenuousness of the arguments presented in Kent P. Hickey’s Feb. 6 op-ed [“Keep dogma out of abortion debate,” Opinion] would border on the mildly amusing if not for the seriousness of the subject matter: namely, a woman’s access to a legal medical procedure.
As to the mildly amusing angle, Hickey warns of the dangers of dogma and ideological purity in discussions of reproductive rights. In the next breath, evidently before grasping the meaning of these purported evils, he states his desire that funding (again, for a legal, constitutionally protected medical procedure) be eliminated and made unavailable based on the rigidity of his personal views on when life begins. Hickey is obviously entitled to speak his views on his moral opposition to a medical procedure that will never involve his body. Just spare me the lessons on dogma.
--Tim Richards, Seattle
Hickey makes outdated argument
When Kent Hickey asserts that religious institutions should be excused from complying with abortion laws that contradict their dogma, I am reminded of the arguments made by racists in the 1960s when business owners were required to offer their services to black customers, regardless of the segregationist dogma of the proprietor.
--Dick Dickinson, Seattle
Hypocrisy in critique of dogma
Wednesday you had two very interesting op-eds. Froma Harrop’s “Don’t fret the ‘baby bust’ ” [Opinion, Feb. 6] was a thorough debunking of J.V. Last’s Wall Street Journal article, showing his dogma and lack of science while he builds “a palace of hooey.”
Then, next in line was Kent Hickey’s “Keep dogma out of abortion debate.” Harrop would easily do a similar critique of this piece — hopefully reading her article prepared readers to see the dogma in Hickey’s. His “heart” tells him that a fetus is life on a par with the mother’s or any of the rest of us. The “heart” is actually the basic source of dogma. He refers to the Supreme Court’s (backhanded) support in Roe vs Wade, but the court is made up mainly of Catholics — another source of much dogma.
His hypocrisy in criticizing the dogma of the rational scientific side of the debate versus his “right to life” side is a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black.
What is startling is the obvious fact that he doesn’t even know it, as he builds another “palace of hooey.”
Yes, Mr. Hickey, there is a “cure for dogmatism.” It is called education, preferably a good dose of scientific education.
--R.A. Brown, Seattle
A man’s opinion on abortion not welcome
In Kent Hickey’s op-ed on the proposed abortion law, he expresses an anti-abortion stance.
I have a simple solution for you, Mr. Hickey. Since you cannot get pregnant, leave us women alone. You have no business telling a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.
My solution to abortions is simple: If you do not believe in abortions, then don’t have one, but leave each woman to do what is right for her. I do not believe in your god or in your ideas about blastocysts, embryos and fetuses. I believe separation of church and state also protects me from you imposing your beliefs on me.
This country has long protected the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
--Molly Ciliberti, RN, Sammamish