Leave religion out of abortion talk

To the editor:

(re: “Separate religion from our laws,” July 25)

Ms. Helen Krim’s defense of legal abortion contains several false premises.

First, Ms. Krim associates efforts to restrict abortion exclusively with religion, and concludes that such laws would be unconstitutional because the First Amendment prohibits the federal and state governments from establishing religion. The activist organizations of the Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League, Secular Pro-Life and Pro-Life Humanists all disagree with Ms. Krim’s opinion that only religious people could possibly have any moral objections to abortion.

Just as those well-produced ASPCA ads with celebrities with somber music and footage of suffering puppies and kittens may tug at people’s heartstrings, improvements in ultrasound technology — and the fact that one can see video of actual abortions on the internet — no doubt disturb many people’s consciences, including those who aren’t religious.

Second, Ms. Krim warns that restricting abortion may result in “theocracy.” Abortion was illegal in the United States until 1973, and before that, the nation was never considered a theocracy, officially or in practice. Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade decided to legalize abortion on the basis of “the right to privacy,” not religion.

Since the 1980s, however, pro-abortion groups have dishonestly framed legal abortion as a “separation of church and state” issue in order to win public support for their cause, and bully pro-lifers who happen to be religious into silence.

Third, I find Ms. Krim’s logic a little disturbing. Since the civil rights movement was led by Christian clergy such as the Southern Baptist minister, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., of “I want to do God’s will!” and “Thank God almighty, we’re free at last!” fame, were its efforts to combat segregation and racial discrimination somehow illicit? Should federal, state and local social assistance programs be declared unconstitutional because the Bible, Talmud, Koran and many other religious texts urge believers to help the poor, elderly and the sick?

A short time after she won the primary, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez published an article for the liberal Catholic America magazine’s website explaining how her Catholic beliefs (which she never mentioned before) led her to oppose mass incarceration. Does Ms. Krim believe that U.S. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez was wrong to invoke her religious faith to justify public policy?

Isn’t it ironic (don’t you think?) that some of the loudest voices on the left who are quick to invoke “the separation of church and state” never object whenever religion (including texts, beliefs and clergy of different faiths) happens to support their own political and public policy goals.

Dimitri Cavalli

Have an opinion? Share your thoughts as a letter to the editor. Make your submission to letters@riverdalepress.com. Please include your full name, phone number (for verification purposes only), and home address (which will not be published).