I will admit right now, even with my longstanding love of Objectivism, I was never aware that I disagreed with your view that abortion rights are morally right. In this, it is another area where I will not say there is a grey area.

If we are going to say on one hand that individual rights are paramount, and then on the other say that we have the right to decide the life or death of another individual, we are contradicting ourselves. If I recall correctly, Ms. Rand’s non-fiction works were to tear away the contradictions of liberal philosophy, so I am having a hard time rapping my head around the idea that the philosophy I have lived my entire life (even before I knew it had a name) would condone killing another individual. And I will not try to obfuscate the topic with any sort of religious declarations. We must stick with rational argument.

In Texas, if a man makes a decision to break into my home, I have the right to shoot him dead. He chose to enter my domicile against my wishes to steal my property. I have the right, under Texas State law to shoot him to protect myself, my family, my property. He forced my reaction, I did not drag him through my door way and place the family silver in his hands then shoot him.

On the side of abortion, we all must admit that it is used as birth control for irresponsible human beings. Allowing abortion, the murder of a human being in utero, is tatamount to what I described in the last half of the above paragraph. Embryos do not spontaneously occur within the womb, despite certain religious beliefs. Parthogenesis is so far scientifically unproven. It takes the act of two people agreeing to a sexual relationship, usually without benefit of birth control, then not wanting to take the responsibility for the resulting pregnancy. This is the abortion I disagree with.

In the case of rape, where it is non-consensual, and in the event of the life of the mother being endangered, I do agree with abortion.

The life that is started has no say. That individual life cannot make that decision to end their life, and therefore should be protected until it can. Here ends my argument against abortion.

Now, to get into the squishy side of it. I am a Catholic (yes, one of the few who believe, and it’s for my comfort, not anything else) who has had an abortion, so I know of which I speak. If you have anything resembling a conscience, it will eat at you, the knowledge that you have killed something that you had no right to kill. Especially, when you believe as I believe, that individuals, all of them, have a right to live as they chose. Innocent life should be protected until it shows it’s potential and decides for itself how it wants to proceed.

True reproductive rights come from reproducing responsibly, having only as many children as you can afford. I was able to support four. I have been fortunate in keeping a clear head in my life and being able to raise four beautiful children never lets me forget the one I chose not to. It is the looter’s way to eradicate another person’s life to make my own better. I do not have the right to take another life to make my own happier. Also, if I am a good Objectivist and think rationally, instead of panicking because my birth control failed, I have to admit my responsibility and do my best to take care of it. I chose wrongly at the age of 19, and 26 years later I still beat myself up over that one wrong decision. Because I went against my beliefs and decided that my happiness in life was more important than the life I was carrying.

Angela Richter

in this article you speak of women and their reproductive rights. can you explain what you mean and where these rights derive? also, what about the rights of the child? the term for ending a pregnancy is abortion. what are is being aborted? and what happens if the abortion is not performed? that thing, that fetus or embryo depending on the stages of gestation, is the beginning of human life. it is a human, an individual, with, as one should expect, all the rights of a living individual. no one has the right to kill it without cause. i am honestly curious about any flaws you may see in my argument. please let me hear your thoughts or the thoughts of anyone who may be in a position to address them.

thanks, chris