To the editor:

Why is a vet concerned with abortion? Why would a veteran of war take a life? Why were the Viet Nam Vets called baby killers? The name calling came from those who were not there and were against war and killing. Peace and love were their answer.

The offspring of peace and love now assert the killing of babies as their right, in a time of peace and love. They who claim the sanctity of killing the baby as a means to control their body. The claim is as a freedom of choice. Let us examine the logic.

Bearing a child is not a choice, it is a consequence of a choice. Full knowledge of a choice is personal responsibility. Speeding has consequence, do you kill the patrolman? Saying the child is part of the mother’s body would mean the mother feels the pain of the infant being mutilated. The bodies are separate. A totally new genetic make-up is called a human body. One half of all infants are of a different gender than the mother who made the choice. The hosting mother is closer to the young female body that is created by the consequence of her choice. Killing the female infant is the closest to the mother’s body and would answer the feminist’s choice of her body.

A combat veteran is called a baby killer when in truth he never did such an act. The combat veteran’s wife who kills their baby somehow is called a political hero. Someone has exchanged the truth for a lie and a lie for the truth. Evil is called good and good is called evil. We have a battle of revelation as the trees begin to bud knowing the summer is near.

No death penalty for the convicted criminal, yet, some advocate the innocent sinless are considered convicted as a consequent choice not of their own.

A recent photo of a reproductive age female released from school to protest a pro-life legislative bill emulated not a ring on a finger buy a ring in her nose.

John C. Kolbe

Sleepy Eye