I am writing in response to the Friday, Jan. 17 editorial titled “No death penalty” written by Jesse Brennan. Jesse writes in the editorial, “Could someone please enlighten me why a young couple deserves the death penalty when what they did is only minutes away from what our President Clinton, Senator Harkin and others have endorsed.” Jesse is referring to the two young college freshman who have admitted to putting their newly born child in a dumpster, apparently after killing it.

Sure Jesse, you see the president and Senator Harkin endorsing this type of thing on C-Span all the time.

If Jesse really believes that what these two young students did is “only minutes” away from what the president and Senator Harkin endorse, than I think that our Jesse may possibly be a little further than “only minutes” away from reality. Let me enlighten Jesse for a moment.

First, nowhere in the medical community will you find a procedure called “partial birth abortion.” What you will find is a procedure called “intact dilation and evacuation.”

“Partial birth abortion” is simply a propaganda scheme drummed up by the radical right wing that brings us such intellectual humanitarians as “B-1 Bob” Doran, Pat Buchanan, Jesse Helms, and who could ever forget the newly reprimanded Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.

Second, people like Jesse would have the public believe that these “partial birth” abortions are as common as apple pie. In reality, the intact D&E procedure is only used in the most rare cases when WANTED pregnancies go wrong late in pregnancy, usually severe fetal anomalies that threaten the pregnant woman’s life or health. In fact, these late term procedures account for less than 1% of the total abortions in the United States each year.

The bill that would have restricted the procedure entitled the “Partial Birth Abortion Act” was thankfully vetoed by President Clinton and upheld in the Senate. The reason that President Clinton vetoed the bill, and Senator Harkin voted in favor of the veto is simple. The bill makes no exceptions for abortions that are necessary to save a woman’s life and health if her fetus is not viable.

Jesse may also like to know that one of the pillars of the Republican party, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott voted in favor in favor of President Clinton’s veto. Isn’t there an old saying that says: “He/She who lives in a glass house should not throw stones?”

Jesse, nobody likes abortion. Unfortunately there are some tragic circumstances that may require the procedure in order to save a woman’s life when her fetus is not viable. I cannot see the logic in not having an abortion when your wife or mother is possibly going to die and her fetus is fatally abnormal.

Will both of their deaths make you feel any better? Will that ease your conscience? Why not save the woman’s life in hopes of having the chance to have another child. Thus, the procedure while tragic at one point, may be one that spawns life in the future.

To complete my enlightenment of Jesse I need to emphasize the fact that what these two young students did was not a “right” given to them by anybody, not even Planned Parenthood like Jesse said in the editorial.

To make sure, I called the Ames office of Planned Parenthood and asked them if they advocated throwing newly born children in trash dumpsters and they assured me that they didn’t.

I think Jesse’s logic in the editorial is borderline idiotic but frankly is all too common among so many of our right wing friends who have watched one too many episodes of the 700 Club. Jesse, maybe you should give up your anti-abortion campaign and join up with Pat Buchanan and start building that wall between the United States and Mexico. That sounded like a real winner. Good Luck.

Mike Milligan

Senior

Communication Studies and Political Science