Preserve choice

The U.S. Supreme Court has made another chink in the armor of contraceptive opportunities for employees. The majority saw the Constitution one way, but the women judges, who also believe in our Constitution, saw it differently. Ironic that no male justice has been pregnant when they didn’t wish to be. It’s no coincidence that the women were appointed by Democrat presidents.

Columnist Mona Charen (July 1) says this case was not about contraception, but about abortion.

Sensibly, the more means of contraception available, the fewer abortions there will be. No one wants to have an abortion; a heart-rending decision. But those who don’t want to have one don’t have to. We must keep laws for that freedom of choice in each person’s private life, because only they know what is best in their situation. Having a baby is the most profound event in a woman’s life. How can they be forced to do this?

People against abortion speak of emotional trauma to the woman. They never mention the lifetime heartbreak of relinquishing a baby for adoption. We all cherish the right to our own religious views, but they should not be practiced in a way that curtails the rights of others.

Roz Luther

Spokane