In the unlikely event that the abortion debate is ever resolved, we will not even have addressed the real problem ["Political Climate Energizes Abortion Foes," Metro, Jan. 23]: unwanted pregnancies. Abortion is one solution, good or bad. Yet eliminating the solutions does nothing to address the problem.

We would be much better served if both sides of the debate agreed that abortion is not a good solution to the problem of unwanted pregnancies and focused their efforts on finding effective solutions.

Both sides of the abortion debate display a great deal of creativity and energy. Too bad it is wasted on a no-win solution.




In writing about abortion, Kermit Roosevelt said, "The idea that unelected judges should consult their inner oracles to decide whether a particular activity unmentioned in the Constitution deserves to be elevated to the pantheon of 'fundamental rights' was always problematic" [op-ed, Jan. 22].

Perhaps the professor could follow up his column with an examination of what else one cannot find in the Constitution but is the "law of the land" today. The idea that we should be frozen in time, guided solely by what was deemed correct in 1789, is ridiculous.


Cambridge, Mass.