In the Mail Tribune editorial March 14 it states that "(Shady Cove) residents can pretty much burn whatever they want whenever they want." This is not correct.

In the Mail Tribune editorial March 14 it states that "(Shady Cove) residents can pretty much burn whatever they want whenever they want." This is not correct.

The current Shady Cove Ordinance No. 172 specifically prohibits the open burning of numerous materials and substances.

Furthermore, the ordinance clearly states the following:

"Open burning of any kind is prohibited on all days of the year when the maximum ventilation index is below 400." "Open burning is prohibited during the Fire Season as established by the local Fire District."

Proponents of a ban on open burning wish to establish an ordinance that would prohibit burning of all materials including yard waste at any time of the year.

I do have a question. The editorial states in one paragraph that the City Council considered the issue of an open burning ban last year and again at a recent meeting but then the concluding paragraph begins with the words "ignoring issues like these."

How can the council be considering the issue of open burning and ignoring it at the same time?

As to the issue of municipal water, that discussion is far too complex for a letter such as this. — Ruth Keith, Shady Cove mayor

Thank you, Jack Jordan. In his letter, he made the point quite nicely that women who choose abortion and women whose actions kill their children are held to different standards. The fact that abortion is legal right now doesn't change the moral responsibility mothers have to protect the well-being of the unborn humans in their care.

Consider what we all know: An unborn child has no possibility of being born to another species. He or she is human from the moment of conception.

"Human-ness" is not determined by size, level of development, environment or degree of dependency. Examples exist all around us of the legal protection that we accord to people who are challenged in these areas. We will vigorously defend the rights of a baby born prematurely, while allowing a full-term unborn baby to be killed through late-term abortion.

He's right, the legal standards should be the same. But instead of lowering the legal standards of one, we should raise the legal standards of the other. The same laws that protect babies from the instant they're born need to be applied equally to our youngest human beings from the moment of their conception. All humans need equal protection. — Timothy Smith, Talent

It's good that Senator Obama has a mesmerizing persona, because the text of his words doesn't stand up to scrutiny. As Obama descended on Medford after a racially charged week, consider the racial implications of his support of abortion.

Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider, locates 80 percent of its centers in minority neighborhoods. Almost one-third of its abortions are performed on black women, who only constitute 13 percent of the population. Almost as many black babies are aborted as are born.

These racist statistics are further confirmed by the seven-state investigation conducted by pro-life students at UCLA last summer, which highlighted Planned Parenthood's willingness to accept donations from a supposed donor whose stated intention was "to lower the number of black people." Where is Obama's opposition to racism in abortion? Conveniently absent, as he marches in lock-step with the Democratic platform, to the detriment of his own people. — Kristin O'Driscoll, Jacksonville