Amazing, isn't it? The same old argument about women being "forced" to bear children, of unwanted pregnancies destroying quality of life, of rape victims being victimized again by carrying the children of that crime.
Let me ask the author of an Oct. 6 letter: How many women do you know who were raped, coerced, slaves to their wombs? Or more likely, a victim of their own bad choices, desperation to be loved, or falling prey to peer pressure?
Were these abortions truly for the mother's sake or for convenience, to make the problem go away?
I speak from experience. Peer pressure, my own curiosity, and fear that I might lose my boyfriend took me to a choice that I made, and the result was a very much unwanted pregnancy.
Was my quality of life affected? You bet.
Did I lose my boyfriend? Sure did.
Was I a slave to the "tissue" growing in my womb? For nine months I carried the shame, though it would have been easy to have it swept away.
However, out of adversity comes strength. Through good counsel (thank you Heartbeat) I was given the courage to face my problem and not to punish this baby for my actions. How we choose to face our problems determines whether this becomes a tragedy.
My son is now a father himself, a wonderful man, a joy to all of us who know him. I can't imagine life without him, or my beautiful granddaughter. I'm sure he agrees that being a slave to my uterus was not such a bad thing. I found a closer relationship with God and my parents.
What I'm most grateful for is that I can look back without regret. If I had chosen to terminate, look what I'd be missing now.
An Oct. 6 letter about the abortion debate by Sally Keller suggested that many pregnancies are the result of rape or incest. I should clarify. After all, the word "many" is subjective.
In actuality, 95 percent of all abortions are performed as birth control. Only 1 percent are performed on rape or incest victims. That doesn't qualify as "many" to me.
She also portrayed the pregnant woman to be the "victim." In my opinion, the "victim" is the precious unborn and unwanted baby.
Maybe as a nation we would be stronger if we all took responsibility for our actions and dealt with the consequences. That doesn't seem to be a premise the liberals will stand for. I have no doubt that an unplanned pregnancy can be devastating.
However, are you telling me that having a child sucked out of you is not devastating or traumatic? There are other alternatives and it's time we stopped considering abortion as one. You want to call me a religious ideologue? You want to call me an evil conservative?
When it comes to protecting the rights of the unborn, I am proud to be called both.
Over the last few months I have heard, seen, and learned more about COSI than I had over all the years it has been in existence. Quite clearly this must have something to do with a dynamic marketing ploy.
Now the board of directors has decided to eliminate the marketing director's position. Who are these people and what are they thinking?
I remember 9/11.
America was attacked by terrorists, mostly Arab, who were indoctrinated and trained by the Taliban's Islamic fundamentalists in Afghanistan and financed by Osama bin Laden, another Arab.
Perhaps we would have cleaned up Afghanistan and collected bin Laden's head by now had we focused on the perpetrators of 9/11 instead of squandering our resources on a different war.
Iraq played no role in 9/11 and posed no terrorist threat until our invasion deposed hedonistic despot Saddam Hussein and disbanded his ruthless security police, who rendered potential rivals, including al-Qaeda, inside Iraq impotent. The chaos of our bungled occupation then enabled terrorists to set up shop in Iraq.
"Doves" found Scott Ritter's pre-invasion skepticism regarding weapons of mass destruction more credible than the Bush Administration's speculative assertions of imminent mortal threats.
The doves were right!
No WMD were found, and the Downing Street Memo has since revealed a British perception that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
Militaristic hawks have weakened America by invoking 9/11 to place our troops in harm's way and start an unnecessary war in Iraq, wasting hundreds of billions of dollars while diminishing our stature and destroying our credibility abroad.
Iraq has become a terrorists' urban warfare training camp, a fact that has not made the streets of Toledo safer! According to the Washington Post, international terrorist attacks were more numerous in 2004 than any previous year, and the 2005 rate is even higher.
The Oct. 1 Los Angeles Times reported that our generals serving in Iraq testified that "the 149,000 U.S. troops currently in Iraq are increasingly part of the problem" and that "the presence of U.S. forces was fueling the insurgency."
But an immediate pull-out is impossible. Just what is a "quagmire?"
DONALD J. STIERMAN
Why has The Blade taken its stand on evolution? It is not sensible, logical, or consistent.
You say you are opposed to "intelligent design" being taught in the public school system. You prefer only the science of Darwin's evolutionary theory. You indicate you want only one idea of the origin of man and the world taught in the schools. You believe that Darwin's concept is "a bedrock; thoroughly proven concept in science" and the other is a distraction.
Your stand flies in the face of constitutional right of freedom of speech - which you believe in. You present in your paper such names as Jack Kelly, Rose Russell, Kathleen Parker, Thomas Sowell, Marilou Johanek, and more.
You allow more than one idea in the arena of our country's politics, and you don't consider these variant political viewpoints a distraction. (I, for one. thank you for it.)
The media supported Darwin's theory at the Scopes Trial not because they believed in it or disbelieved in it so much, but because they stood for freedom of speech. Now the shoe is on the other foot and the media are going against their original stand and what they say they believe in.
Furthermore, science and the Bible do not conflict, but Darwin's theory and the Bible do conflict.
Truth says where there is design, there is a designer. Reality says life comes from something bigger than itself. Something which exists has to come from something else. Life says life reproduces after its own kind. Where there is law, there is a lawmaker.
Does Darwin's evolutionary theory support these elementary truths of life?
But the Bible and science teach these things.
I urge The Blade to rethink and re-evaluate its position on this issue.
JOHN L. HIBBLER
The Bush haters are complaining about President Bush burning jet fuel and going to the Gulf Coast. They seem to forget the fuel burned by Bill Clinton on the tarmac at LAX for two hours waiting for his hairdresser. By the way, no flights were able to take off or land during those two hours. How much fuel did the other planes burn while circling the airport for two hours waiting for Mr. Clinton to get his tresses trimmed?
Mr. Bush can't win with the Bush haters. If he goes to the Gulf states he is wasting fuel for a photo op, and if he doesn't go he is insensitive and doesn't care about the victims.
HARRY A. WATSON