To the editor:

Over the past months I have noticed an attempt to change the vernacular, replacing words I have relied on for clarity during my almost 84 years on this planet, with gender pronouns.

Moreover some in the re-imagining woke progressive crowd have even suggested replacing mother with “birthing person.” Are these people educated beyond their intelligence; or hopelessly void of common sense?

On a birth issue related to reality rather than semantics, this fall the U.S. Supreme Court will review a Mississippi law titled the Gestational Age Act.

In Roe v Wade (1973) the Supreme Court’s decision was based on a new, previously undefined “right of privacy” which it discovered in so-called emanations of penumbrae of the Constitution.

They did not address the question of when life begins. They admitted, however, if personhood is established “…[the] right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the (14th) Amendment.”

The Gestational Age Act extends protection for the unborn starting at 15 weeks when babies have a heartbeat and can feel pain i.e. persons/human beings. The only exceptions would be when the mothers life is seriously threatened, or she faces a substantial, irreparable, and permanent impairment to a major bodily function unless an abortion is performed.

I believe upholding the Act, restoring decisional power to the people of the states would be the right thing to do constitutionally, scientifically and morally.

That said, will the Roberts Court engage in judicial hair splitting?

Bob Jentges

North Mankato