Regarding the editorial "Barrett's religion is her personal business, not the Supreme Court's" (Oct. 15): The term "pro-life" has become a political slogan disguised as a moral position. Hopefully, Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett's personal thoughts on human reproduction are more evolved than Sen. Josh Hawley's.
Though he and Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham claim to be pro-life, they've fought their states' expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. Hawley even recklessly filed suit to invalidate Obamacare when he was Missouri's attorney general. And Hawley stood by while the state dropped children from health insurance programs.
Both Hawley and Graham supported the administration's use of children as pawns in the family separation policy at the border, which continues today. They also advocated for limiting the rights and protections of Americans because of their sexual orientation and refused to allow immigrant children who have grown up in America to become stable, productive citizens.
A principled, pro-life view does not end at birth. It demands that every mother and child be treasured with a respect for life in all the ways it can be demonstrated. Hawley's stand is politically motivated and rings hollow.