To the Editor,

I write this in reply to the suggestion that you support murder by being “pro-choice” and that being “pro-choice” is some sort of ironic dodge to avoid being known as pro-murder.

The politicians who call themselves “pro-choice” are supported by good, hard-working people who also call themselves “pro-choice.” Choice is not an arbitrary word used to neglect the harsh reality of an abortion, but instead an acknowledgement of the substantive due-process rights consistently upheld by the Supreme Court. It was the Supreme Court that decided that, “Under the right of privacy” a person should be “free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision to bear or beget a child.” They would go on to use the word “choice” instead of “decision” in later cases ruling on the fundamental rights of the American People.

Being “pro-choice” does not automatically lead to being “pro-abortion.” That sort of logic would lead me to believe that because you are “pro-Christ” you are “pro-Inquisition.” Yet, I do not believe that to be true. I would not condone abortion as an “easy way out” for my wife or my daughters. But there is no irony in accepting that some people make decisions contrary to your own beliefs.

People who have abortions are not murderers perpetuating torture on an unborn fetus. It is this type of hyperbolic rhetoric that so many find insulting and which will be the downfall of the so-called conservative movement. Murder is clearly defined in the Texas Penal Code as a “person who intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual.” Scroll down a few more sections and it reads, “This section does not apply to the death of an unborn child" if that conduct is done by the "unborn child's mother."

You see, my issue is this. I read the opinions in this paper and I see two glaring differences. On one hand, there is someone I know to be liberally oriented because I see the signs in his yard, and this man is consistently calling for an involved and accepting community of citizens who care about their city, state, and nation. On the other hand, there is the opinion that those who disagree with their beliefs are murderers, torturers, dishonest, ironic (I think the author meant contradictory), and overall bad people.

We can disagree about abortion. We can disagree about the border. But let us agree on this, the ironic murderers who torture unborn babies are far better people than you give them credit for. They are your neighbors. Not everyone shares your worldview, had your upbringing, or subscribes to your doctrine. Fix your gaze on the potholed roads, crumbling bridges, and dwindling supply of water. Substitute your castigation for a little bit of tolerance and let us fix the broken communities that have been unnecessarily divided for too long.

Craig Hargrove, J.D. Candidate, Texas A&M School of Law