The Editor, Sir:

Again the issue of abortion comes up, and again my head begins to hurt me. It reminds me of discussions about issues such as homosexuality, where anyone quoting the Bible is 'correct' and 'moral', and anyone not quoting the Bible is 'incorrect' and 'immoral'.

It gives the 'religious zealots' and the 'purists' the opportunity to quote sections of the Bible that make them (seemingly) winners. The Bible, for them, is and should be taken in absolute terms becoming judge, jury and verdict.

Why should a woman not be given the opportunity to choose? Why should she have to give birth to a child that she can't handle or afford? Why should she give birth to a child who bears the fruit of an unplanned/unpleasant encounter? Or is it that she should have exercised greater control during her sexual proclivities, even if it was a rape case?

Financially stable?

Let us give total disregard for the life of the mother, even if pregnancy/birth means death. Let us remove that democratic right and have a society filled with unwanted kids. After all, we most definitely can support them, especially the (poor) mothers. Aren't our roads in good condition? Aren't most Jamaican fathers present in the household?

Let's face it. Men are the ones who get pregnant so they should have the ultimate say in the determination of a pregnancy, or the lack thereof. Moral judgements should be 'litigated' against women but not men who shirk their responsibilities. Clergymen should be the (only) source, interpreter and executioner of moral judgements.

Why don't we just rip that section of democracy that speaks, in part, about freedom of choice and just send it back from whence it came and just lock up all pregnant killers?

I am, etc.,

ROBIN CLARKE

clarkerobin2002@yahoo.com