Another e-mail, this one back in Massachusetts:

I enjoyed your piece on Scott Brown.
Regarding abortion, I personally find the issue pulling me two ways; and I suspect more people than you might think feel about the way I do in the subject. Namely, that I hate the notion of abortion, but I also hate coercion. I believe most freedom-loving people rebel at the coercion we experience routinely at the hands of the government; and considering that there is valid room for an honest difference of opinion on the beginnings of human life, I have no difficulty imagining a person of good conscience rebelling at a ban of abortions on that basis alone: a desire not to exert control one’s fellow citizens in what might be seen as a most private matter.
But when it comes to federally funding of abortions – there should come a time when a common respect of the beliefs of the millions for whom it would be a catastrophe should count for something. Many of the most patriotic Americans deeply oppose abortion; forcing those people to fund abortions with their tax dollars will change, diminish America simply by diminishing those peoples’ love of country. Even if one imagines that nationalizing the health care industry is a worthy idea, why would anyone who loved his country wish to create such a ugly rift over such a basic issue? It really is another case of rebelling against coercion, a reluctance to force people to fund something which they feel is a venal sin.
I think I have described Mr. Scott Brown’s position. And if I have — if the above roughly describes Mr. Brown’s guiding philosophy – then I can support such a man.