Government intrusion
The Republican-controlled state General Assembly passed a law that is euphemistically referred to as the "Women's Right to Know Act," which took effect in October. I was present at the hearing when U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles placed a preliminary injunction on a portion of the law that required physicians to place an ultrasound image within sight of every pregnant woman seeking an abortion and to provide a verbal description of what the ultrasound revealed, plus offer her the choice of listening to the heartbeat. After hearing the arguments, I was convinced that this law is an example of extreme government intrusion in a decidedly personal matter. The purpose of the law has nothing to do with care for the woman but instead it is designed to coerce, intimidate and inflict a conservative ideology.
State Sen. Pete Brunstetter was reported to have said ("Part of abortion law blocked," Oct. 26) that he was "dismayed" over Judge Eagles' decision, which intruded on a "legislative matter." His dismay could never equal the shock I felt when he helped pass a law that exposed his total disregard for women's ability to make independent, informed decisions.
I cannot imagine a more agonizing decision than whether to have an abortion. Every woman can seek wise, caring counsel from any number of resources to assist her. There are counselors, ministers, physicians and Planned Parenthood available to anyone wrestling with this harrowing decision. This law is an overt assault on women's integrity, intelligence and moral character.
ANNE GRIFFIS WILSON
Winston-Salem
Ballot box
On Nov. 9 I was so proud to be a resident of Clemmons. On Nov. 9 I saw in print what the ballot box can do regarding term limits ("Clemmons voters overhaul council"). Democrats, Republicans, conservatives and liberals came together and gave our elected officials a strong indication of what we expect of them.
Barely re-elected Mayor John Bost should be ashamed of his attitude and language toward us. He works for us as mayor. And no one gets a $6 million check to be thrown into a spending mosh pit to do whatever comes along. Perhaps Bost should resign and allow Clemmons to move on as we the voters choose to do.
MARTHA L. SMITH
Clemmons
Winston-Salem protest?
The Winston-Salem City Council is thinking of giving Occupy Winston-Salem a permit to camp on a public parking lot downtown ("Occupy group seeks OK to camp," Nov. 12). These groups are causing trouble in other cities, and in most places they are overstaying and leaving horrible messes behind.
I understand that this would be a special permit, as camping is not allowed downtown. Will they pay for the permit and insurance like the tea party did in April 2009?
All groups should be treated the same.
There is sickness in these camps, rapes of women and deaths. Do we need this on our streets?
Is this parking lot used by the public? Will people who work and park there be provided with alternative parking? Will they cover the cost of the extra police protection, bring in portable sanitation equipment, cook on the streets, and will the health department be checking this? Will they be bringing in generators to provide heat or have open fires, something not allowed in the city?
I am for free speech and the right to protest, but they are taking this to the extreme. What are they protesting in Winston-Salem? Are they against the job the council members are doing? Do they think our government should be replaced, and with what form of government? Are they protesting the banks, the medical field, the education system? These provide jobs and the tax revenue for our city.
Questions need to be answered before a permit is granted.
PATRICIA KLEINMAIER
Pfafftown
Right on
The writer of the letter "Discontent" (Nov. 12) is right on when he suggests term limits for members of Congress. However, it is a hopeless wish. They would never vote term limits into law because they would lose their power and especially their perks.
The Readers' Forum does a good job of publishing all different opinions.
ANN S. RUTTER
Pfafftown
Permits?
Since when do you have to ask permission, get permits or notify anybody in order to protest ("Panel backs Occupy camping," Nov. 15)? I really don't believe we would have broken the ties with England with this modern-day brand of dissent. That bunch that dumped the tea in Boston Harbor surely must be rolling over in their graves.
CHARLES COLLINS
Mount Airy
Correspondent of the week
The Republican-controlled state General Assembly passed a law that is euphemistically referred to as the "Women's Right to Know Act," which took effect in October. I was present at the hearing when U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles placed a preliminary injunction on a portion of the law that required physicians to place an ultrasound image within sight of every pregnant woman seeking an abortion and to provide a verbal description of what the ultrasound revealed, plus offer her the choice of listening to the heartbeat. After hearing the arguments, I was convinced that this law is an example of extreme government intrusion in a decidedly personal matter. The purpose of the law has nothing to do with care for the woman but instead it is designed to coerce, intimidate and inflict a conservative ideology.
State Sen. Pete Brunstetter was reported to have said ("Part of abortion law blocked," Oct. 26) that he was "dismayed" over Judge Eagles' decision, which intruded on a "legislative matter." His dismay could never equal the shock I felt when he helped pass a law that exposed his total disregard for women's ability to make independent, informed decisions.
I cannot imagine a more agonizing decision than whether to have an abortion. Every woman can seek wise, caring counsel from any number of resources to assist her. There are counselors, ministers, physicians and Planned Parenthood available to anyone wrestling with this harrowing decision. This law is an overt assault on women's integrity, intelligence and moral character.
ANNE GRIFFIS WILSON
Winston-Salem
Ballot box
On Nov. 9 I was so proud to be a resident of Clemmons. On Nov. 9 I saw in print what the ballot box can do regarding term limits ("Clemmons voters overhaul council"). Democrats, Republicans, conservatives and liberals came together and gave our elected officials a strong indication of what we expect of them.
Barely re-elected Mayor John Bost should be ashamed of his attitude and language toward us. He works for us as mayor. And no one gets a $6 million check to be thrown into a spending mosh pit to do whatever comes along. Perhaps Bost should resign and allow Clemmons to move on as we the voters choose to do.
MARTHA L. SMITH
Clemmons
Winston-Salem protest?
The Winston-Salem City Council is thinking of giving Occupy Winston-Salem a permit to camp on a public parking lot downtown ("Occupy group seeks OK to camp," Nov. 12). These groups are causing trouble in other cities, and in most places they are overstaying and leaving horrible messes behind.
I understand that this would be a special permit, as camping is not allowed downtown. Will they pay for the permit and insurance like the tea party did in April 2009?
All groups should be treated the same.
There is sickness in these camps, rapes of women and deaths. Do we need this on our streets?
Is this parking lot used by the public? Will people who work and park there be provided with alternative parking? Will they cover the cost of the extra police protection, bring in portable sanitation equipment, cook on the streets, and will the health department be checking this? Will they be bringing in generators to provide heat or have open fires, something not allowed in the city?
I am for free speech and the right to protest, but they are taking this to the extreme. What are they protesting in Winston-Salem? Are they against the job the council members are doing? Do they think our government should be replaced, and with what form of government? Are they protesting the banks, the medical field, the education system? These provide jobs and the tax revenue for our city.
Questions need to be answered before a permit is granted.
PATRICIA KLEINMAIER
Pfafftown
Right on
The writer of the letter "Discontent" (Nov. 12) is right on when he suggests term limits for members of Congress. However, it is a hopeless wish. They would never vote term limits into law because they would lose their power and especially their perks.
The Readers' Forum does a good job of publishing all different opinions.
ANN S. RUTTER
Pfafftown
Permits?
Since when do you have to ask permission, get permits or notify anybody in order to protest ("Panel backs Occupy camping," Nov. 15)? I really don't believe we would have broken the ties with England with this modern-day brand of dissent. That bunch that dumped the tea in Boston Harbor surely must be rolling over in their graves.
CHARLES COLLINS
Mount Airy
Correspondent of the week
Cal is wrong
In Cal Thomas' column "Penn State's shame — and ours" (Nov. 16), he asserts that the Penn State sexual-abuse scandal is a sign of the moral decay of American society: "… society — buttressed by religion — once did a better job of keeping human nature in check." He says that the decline began in the "free-loving '60s."
Child sexual abuse didn't begin in the 1960s. I have worked with survivors from all over the country. They included people who were abused in the 1940s and even in Thomas' idyllic 1950s.
I agree that our culture has changed, but in this respect, it's a change for the good. A scandal like this would not have happened 50 years ago, but not because there was no abuse. The scandal would not have happened because no one talked about it. Children could not tell, and if they did tell, they were not believed and were sometimes punished for the telling.
While there is much about how the Penn State situation was handled that is unthinkable, the fact remains that a child was able to tell, a mom believed and was able to make a report to the authorities that finally exposed the abuse. That wouldn't have happened 50 years ago. So, you see, change to societal norms is not always a bad thing.
Thomas has put together two and two, only to come up with five. Child sexual abuse is too serious to be treated with such frivolous arguments.
PEGGY HAYMES
Winston-Salem
Sum It UpIn Cal Thomas' column "Penn State's shame — and ours" (Nov. 16), he asserts that the Penn State sexual-abuse scandal is a sign of the moral decay of American society: "… society — buttressed by religion — once did a better job of keeping human nature in check." He says that the decline began in the "free-loving '60s."
Child sexual abuse didn't begin in the 1960s. I have worked with survivors from all over the country. They included people who were abused in the 1940s and even in Thomas' idyllic 1950s.
I agree that our culture has changed, but in this respect, it's a change for the good. A scandal like this would not have happened 50 years ago, but not because there was no abuse. The scandal would not have happened because no one talked about it. Children could not tell, and if they did tell, they were not believed and were sometimes punished for the telling.
While there is much about how the Penn State situation was handled that is unthinkable, the fact remains that a child was able to tell, a mom believed and was able to make a report to the authorities that finally exposed the abuse. That wouldn't have happened 50 years ago. So, you see, change to societal norms is not always a bad thing.
Thomas has put together two and two, only to come up with five. Child sexual abuse is too serious to be treated with such frivolous arguments.
PEGGY HAYMES
Winston-Salem
Do you think the Occupy movement has a
point? Respond to letters@wsjournal.com and put "Sum It Up" in the
subject header. Only signed entries please, no anonymous ones. Briefer responses
receive preference in print.
LTE #3.... "All groups should be treated the same....Questions need to be answered before a permit is granted." just ask them the same question asked to anyone seeking a permit.
ReplyDelete"I am for free speech and the right to protest, but they are taking this to the extreme" I don't know, people seeking a permit to camp out and protest doesn't seem any more extreme to me than people buying elections with their "free speech" money.
When you disparage the youth of the OWS movement, keep in mind, these are the 10-18yo of 9/11,traumatized, many went on to fight for this country,but they all can see who has sacrificed and who has benefitted over the past 10 years and now that they are entering "adult" society, who could really blame them for being disillusioned with what the "adults" are handing them? We can give corporations freedom to speak with their money, but we can't give citizens freedom to speak with their tents?
ReplyDelete