“Life Begins At Conception” is the central tenet of the Pro-Life movement. Not when you can hear the heartbeat, not when the baby moves, not when the woman decides it’s a baby, no. Life begins at conception. Period. Paragraph. Full Stop. This, apparently, is a difficult idea for some of the terminally stupid. A letter to the editor of the “LA Times,” posted today, July 24, sought to take the Pro-Life movement to task for not caring for the ovum. Duh, what?

T’is true. The title above the letter reads, “A woman’s body kills one ovum a month. Where’s the pro-life movement for those potential humans?” You cannot make this shit stuff up. From the article:

Responding to the letter writer who posited that abortion is considered an important right precisely because it prevents a fetus from developing into a child, every female baby is born with all the ova she will ever have inside her — several hundred of them, far more than she could ever carry to term.

The natural fate of most of these potential humans is to die, flushed from the woman’s body, one per month. Just as there is no advantage, practical or humane, to thinking of these lost ova as “dead babies,” so there is also no advantage or moral necessity in applying such thinking to the early stages of development after fertilization.

Jesus take the wheel! Okay, so, I need to dissect this. Abortion prevents a child from developing. Every female is born with several hundred ova already formed. Therefore, since not all ova are fertilized, it is not logical to think of embryos as babies, in the warped world of the letter writer.

Did I get that right? But the letter writer goes on. Again from the article:

Like an ovum, a fertilized zygote is a pinhead-sized speck of cytoplasm. It is many weeks away from becoming a baby, and weeks from developing a brain capable of conscious awareness. Furthermore, about 20% of conceptions naturally end in miscarriage. To me, the evidence is clear that the early stages of human development are designed to be expendable.

There is ample time at the beginning of gestation for a woman to make a choice. There is no reason why it has to be a moral dilemma in terms of loss of human life.

I doubt the letter writer has ever had a moral dilemma. There are those who can rationalize anything. Especially, if it is inconvenient to the life or world view of those who are doing the rationalization.

Here is the kicker to all this. Ready? According to the “LA Times:”

Carol Wuenschell, Arcadia

The writer holds a doctorate in biology with specialization in developmental biology.

There is a popular phrase right now “Intelligent Yet Ignorant” or “IYI.” I propose a new phrase “Educated Yet Terminally Stupid” or “EYTS.” Life is so beautiful. Life is so precious. As I am writing this I found out that someone’s five-month-old daughter died in her sleep.

I believe life begins at conception. I believe life is beautiful. I believe every life is worthwhile and precious. I believe the letter writer is terminally stupid, but her life is precious. I just don’t want her making life decisions for any but her and maybe not even her.