Two views on abortion
Thank you to Ruth Conniff and Isthmus for her column lamenting the departure of a Madison doctor who provides critical abortion care to women (a href=http://www.isthmus.com/isthmus/article.php?article=29768>"Good Health Care Includes Abortion," 7/9/10). Anti-choice groups have exploited this doctor's departure from Madison, claiming victory in their fight to block Madison women from accessing second-trimester abortion services.
In her column, Conniff recognizes the gap in women's health services that her doctor friend was determined to fill. What happens to the woman diagnosed with cancer who must terminate her pregnancy to receive lifesaving treatment? Or the woman who learns a severe fetal anomaly will leave her baby unable to survive outside the womb? Or the 14-year-old incest victim, too ashamed to tell anyone she was pregnant until she could no longer hide it?
No woman faced with terminating her pregnancy under dire circumstances should have to travel far from home to receive care - away from her family, her doctors and her support system. Thank you for a column that highlighted the real story - and real tragedy - of the gap in abortion care in Madison.
Lisa Subeck, executive director, NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin
Your pro-abortion article is another that should be banned. Why on earth would we expect the majority of taxpayers (who are anti-abortionists) to pay for someone to have a medical procedure that is the plain fault of the person having it? Unless of course rape. [Editor's note: The column clearly stated that the issue at hand, medical training, did not involve the use of tax dollars.]
Over one million "murders" of innocent human beings are committed every year. At a cost of billions. It makes no sense at all. As our U.S. birthrate is now down below 2%, it would take at least 100 years to get back to a percentage (2.1%) that will continue our culture. Otherwise the Spanish and Muslims who are at 8% will be the dominant culture in America and Europe.
Take a look at Detroit. Disaster with over half the population having left the city and 400,000 illegals and 300,000 Muslims have taken over and trashed the city. It has been destroyed. Is that what we want?
John C. Hyland, Appleton
Gun item ignorant rant
I had a good laugh at Bill Lueders' "Watch Out!" column ranting at the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling over local gun laws ("Madison Gun Laws Pre-Slain," 7/9/10).
Another ignorant liberal view. He must have forgotten, since 1995, Madison has been voted the best place to live. Even when these liberal Madison gun laws were squashed. Only until recently, the choice of a murder weapon in Dane County was a knife; even when those liberal Madison gun laws were already squashed!
Freedom is not free. The reactionary Madison police cannot be everywhere. So you have your choice: Defend yourself and family however you wish, or call 911 and hope they relay it to the police, who may or may not react in time to clean up the remains of your family as you chose not to defend your liberal selves.
Anti-everything nuts, to the Socialist City Council! Ready. Start whining!
Cashiers make ramps safer
In "Overture Looks to the Future" (7/16/10), Joe Tarr investigates the erasing of the center's debt, but in no way addresses the impact on Overture's now-city employees. This seems irresponsible.
And why, later in the column, did Tarr devote only a few graphs to the proposed automation of the city's parking ramps? This is a crucial safety issue for the city of Madison. Parking cashiers do much more than collect money for the city. They work as unofficial ambassadors to the city and promote downtown growth. They have a huge impact on safety and dissuade criminal acts.
Cashiers are the eyes and ears of the ramps. They are on constant watch; they are diligent. Cashiers are required in the ramps for the safety of Madison's citizens.
Tana Polansky Maurer
I'm glad you wrote about primate research at UW ("Man Over Monkey," 7/16/10), but I wish more emphasis had been given to the amazing medical advances it has generated instead of insinuating that UW just does it for the grant money.