Contact Us Advertising Information Online exclusives Cover Story Buzz Feature In Case You Missed It Vote 2009 Boulderganic Fall 2009 Student Guide 2009 Boulder Weekly Sweet 16 Anniversary Boulderganic 2009 Summer Scene 2009 Email Newsletter Legal Services Best of Boulder 2009 Annual Manual 2009 Newspaper of the Future Kids Camp Guide 2009 Wedding Marketplace 09 Jobs available Student Guide 2008 Best of Boulder 2008 Annual Manual 2008 Join Our Mailing List
|
August 28-September 3, 2008 editorial@boulderweekly.com
• See Jim Hightower
• See Danish Plan
• See Stew's Views
No to Amendment 48
(Re: “Which comes first: a woman or her egg?” cover story, July 31.) I hope people come to their senses and protect a woman’s right to choose. It is unbelievable that Nicaragua and El Salvador have adopted such insensitive and barbaric anti-abortion laws, that women are dying of ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages, etc. The hypocrisy of the Catholic Church knows no bounds. They have learned nothing from their mistakes.
A woman’s right to choose must be protected. So-called Christians who are trying to govern a woman’s choices seem to me to be anti-woman, anti-family and unpatriotic. Unpatriotic because to trivialize women’s rights is to act like the Middle Eastern Taliban, who treat their women like chattel. Controlling women through their reproductive choices and options is wrong. An unhappy woman cannot have a happy family, so this impacts everyone.
I have heard that Native American women believe generally that it is the woman’s place to choose whether to carry a fetus to term. So extremist Christians are once again imposing their beliefs on a culture which is matriarchal, balanced and hopefully recuperating from so many decades of mistreatment and cultural wipe-out by Christian missionaries.
Say no to Amendment 48. Say yes to “Every Child A Wanted Child.” The born should have rights they don’t get these days — the right to health care, the right to food and shelter, the right to dignified, steady employment. The Earth’s human population cannot be sustained at this rate. Time-wasters like this Amendment 48 are a drag on what we all need to focus on — climate change and how the human race will survive the coming droughts, famines and other disasters.
I heard a nutty idea from a caller to a radio show, where it was suggested that male infants receive a vasectomy at circumcision. This could be reversed after 25, after extensive education and counseling. Anybody up for that? We in the U.S. don’t want to adopt the extreme measures of the Chinese communists in controlling their population. But certainly encouraging families to have only as many children as they can afford, or even to say two to three, needs to happen.
While I can appreciate some of the Right To Lifers views, and acknowledge that they have made some positive influences on the abortion debate, I hope they can look at the hypocrisy of forcing women to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, and so many unintended consequences of crazy ideas like Amendment 48, proposed by a 20-year-old young lady, backed by extremist, misogynist organizations whose ultimate goal is simply control of women, because they’re a bunch of insecure men!
Suzanne Taichert/via Internet
We need the DNC
(Re: “Dirty bomb scare,” ICUMI, Aug. 7.) Your editorial was slightly slanted. DNC is projected to bring in huge amounts of revenue and in this economy, we need it. What is wrong with taking measures to try to make it a safe week for everyone?
Hopefully you won’t look too silly if “it does happen.” Councilman Linkhart was at least proactive enough to act on a hunch. Kinda reminds me of what could have (not) happened if a few other government officials had acted the same way, say, 10 years ago.
M. Raveling/via Internet
Iran’s rights
(Re: “Stop the heart of Iran,” Letters, Aug. 14.) This is my response to Robert Damashek’s letter printed Aug. 14. As a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has the right in law to enrich uranium for power reactors. Saudi Arabia and other oil exporters are pursuing nuclear power. With prices so high, it is more lucrative to use less oil to export more.
According to the recent U.S. intelligence estimate, Iran has never had a bomb program. It would take Iran five to 15 years to produce weapons-grade uranium.
The Bush administration is pursuing an illegal nuclear deal with India, a non-signatory to the NPT, that would free up resources for their bomb program. If not for the NPT there would be 25 nuclear weapons states. That many states can acquire the bomb in five to 15 years.
The NPT is collapsing under the weight of the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war, U.S. development of “usable” nukes and reneging on the treaty commitment to abolish nuclear weapons.
When Bush leads us to war, 90 percent of the people who die are civilians going on with their lives, most of them children. Iran told Europe they will make concessions, but for security guarantees, not trade advantages.
Gary Erb/Boulder
Obama’s tax plan
To counter recent false and misleading attack ads by John McCain on Barack Obama’s tax proposals, here is the gist of Obama’s tax plan for America: Obama would reverse the Bush tax policy, which heavily favors the mega-rich. He would lower taxes for the poor and middle-class families (below $150,000), increase taxes for the rich, those earning upwards of $250,000 a year, and simplify it so most Americans could file in five minutes. He would eliminate all taxes on seniors making less than $50,000 and they would not have to file. He would give 150 million working Americans up to a $500 tax credit. To help fix the Social Security system, he would apply a tax of 2 to 4 percent on all incomes above $250,000.
It’s clear from his proposals that Barack Obama is not beholden to the wealthy and powerful, the corporations or lobbyists. He is for the average American. On the other hand, John McCain would make the Bush tax cuts for the rich permanent. On Aug. 16, McCain defined the rich as those making more than $5 million a year and those making less as middle class. This elitist notion places him way out of the mainstream. Of course, being married to a multi-millionaire beer heiress will do that to you. Whose tax plan is the best for you and the best for America? (Sources: www.FactCheck.org.)
Cliff Cleland/via Internet
The war project
The next time you receive a project at work, tell your boss you’re not going to meet the deadline because you’ll just finish it when it’s done. In fact, tell your boss that not only will you not meet the due date, but you’re not even going to set one. Now, pretend the project involves millions of hours in manpower in addition to billions of dollars in investments. You think the boss will just be fine with getting it done whenever it gets done?
Don’t worry, tell them. It could be a few days. It could be a few weeks. It could even be a few months. You know, whenever…
As we all know, the real world doesn’t work like this. All successful organizations set deadlines for their projects, and if those deadlines aren’t met, people get fired. When you’re late on an assignment and constantly asking for a bigger budget, the bosses will move you out in place of someone who can meet deadlines and balance bottom lines. There’s always someone else out there waiting to compete, waiting to produce and waiting to take responsibility. That’s the nature of capitalism.
So in Iraq, why is it that this American way of thought is opposed by politicians from the party that claims to have the most patriotic Americans?
How can they try to convince a whole nation of bosses (and “We The People” are the ones doing the hiring in this analogy) that it’s OK for us not to set a deadline on what is the biggest project for our company (The United States of America) in the last 10 years?
And why are we allowing the GOP to justify its desire to not set goals in Iraq by saying those who do want goals really just want to surrender?
Apparently Republican leaders don’t think our nation is capable to set deadlines in Iraq and meet them. Either that, or they’re too busy making money and producing fear off the war to want it to end. The real surrender, here, is when GOP candidates give up on deadlines because they don’t think the United States is capable of meeting them, and when the American people give in to Republican, smokescreen rhetoric designed to cover up incompetence.
So let’s all start acting like the bosses here, because we are.
The next time you interview a candidate at the ballot box, think about how ridiculous it is to not set deadlines in what has become the biggest project in our country’s recent history. Then think about how ridiculous it is that some people say imposing deadlines is ridiculous. My boss wouldn’t accept me arbitrarily extending a due date for one month, so why are we letting a man running for the highest office in the land extend a deadline by 100 years?
Talk about surrender.
Chad Allen Stamm/via Internet
Respond: letters@boulderweekly.com
Back to top
|
| |
