The letter you ran on Nov. 14 with the headline, “Roe could be linked to today’s worker shortage,” is ludicrous. I would like to find throughout the Insight section writing that challenges us all to be better thinkers. Too often, I find instead writing that demands we forgo thinking altogether. This particular letter sets a new low.

The writer fundamentally misunderstands or intentionally misrepresents the labor shortage as a problem of insufficient population. This error or choice enables her to take the odd position of wishing unrewarding, inadequately compensated work upon those unborn individuals she pretends to be defending.

Furthermore, regardless of one’s feelings on abortion, we must agree that pinning our arguments to purely imagined events (such as the hypothetical actions of people who do not exist) is a fool’s game. Perhaps if I had four children, one would solve climate change, the second would eradicate global hunger, the third would eliminate racial inequality, and the fourth would invent an even tastier kind of pizza. These thoughts should not meaningfully contribute to a discussion of whether I should have four kids. Humankind’s greatest atrocities may have been precluded if only Hitler’s mother had aborted fetal Adolf. Should we take from that possibility some directive regarding reproductive rights?

A good opinion section represents a multitude of voices from the communities it serves, but I hereby offer a reminder that you are not under any obligation to print arguments entirely devoid of logic.

Joshua W. Jackson
Portland