As someone who admits to voting for Kamala Harris, I also admit that I didn’t agree with all of her policy positions. One that I disagreed with the most, and which I think hurt his campaign, was his stated opposition to any legal limits on abortion, as if all abortions were health care or reproductive rights, not homicide, the killing of one human being by another. Anyone who thinks that abortion is by definition health care must think that pregnancy is an illness.

Kamala Harris would have been more appealing if she had stood up for the rights of all human beings and not excluded the youngest, smallest, most innocent human beings, which we all once were. Abortion kills children, half of whom are girls. The problem is not that a woman only controls her own body. The problem is thinking that another human being is so worthless that they can be thrown away as unwanted property. This was the philosophy of slavery, not human rights.

Killing a fetus is no more moral than killing an infant. Unlimited abortion is no more moral than infanticide. Each of us has been a fetus and we should wish for others the same rights that we ourselves have possessed since our conceptions.

An unnecessary abortion deprives not only the mother of her child, but also the father of his child. Parents should want to protect the lives of the children they have conceived rather than killing them. Adoption is much more moral than abortion. Black lives matter, white lives matter, and all lives matter, including the youngest children. Kamala Harris should have spoken out in favor of human rights and health care by speaking out against abortions, except in certain cases, such as physically endangering the life of the mother.

Daniel Haulman, Montgomery

This article was originally published on Montgomery Advertiser: Letter: Stance on abortion hurt Kamala Harris’ campaign