I WAS interested to see the juxtaposition of two opposing views on abortion in your letters of September 4. My sympathies were entirely with Francis Vrijmoed, much less with Helen Lucas. Ms Lucas claims an embryo or foetus does not feel pain when torn apart. Important as this question certainly is, surely in the matter of abortion the supreme concern must be the value of what is being destroyed. A Ming vase shattered on the floor feels no pain at all, but we mourn its loss. Is a human life of less value than a Ming vase? As Ms Vrijmoed points out, we all started our existence as a fertilised ovum. Had my mother decided on abortion when she was pregnant with me, I would never have existed thereafter. What a pity the mothers of all the pro-abortionists did not assign them to the same fate they regard as so acceptable for others! It's all very well for them to cry out, ''Pro-choice'' when they themselves are well clear of danger. More seriously, referring again to the matter of values, I believe there is a deeper and wider issue here even than the tragic loss of any individual. It is what effect the practice of abortion has on society. Under the protection of law, human life is being destroyed to suit the whims of people - both men and women - who refuse to face their responsibilities towards the children they have conceived. This reduced value of life will not stop at the destruction of unborn children. There are members of society who can be considered equally ''inconvenient''. I believe it is no coincidence that, after 26 years of ''enjoying'' the freedom of its abortion law, Britain has now begun a serious debate on legalising euthanasia. Had we had the moral fibre in 1967 to uphold the value of human life against the pro-abortionists, there would be no such debate today. But one thing leads to another, and for those promoting it, we may be sure euthanasia is not the last of their demands. The society that accepts a reduced value of human life has begun to collapse in on itself. C. TALLACH Kwun Tong
