Not necessarily doomed
Karen Schnabel of Talent advances the notion that those persons who value the life of unborn children live in la-la land, unaware of reality. I have seen the pictures of tiny babies cut apart in their mother's womb. I have read the stories of grief and loss that many moms that chose to abort are experiencing.
She confuses two issues in her letter: Killing innocent children and the claim that unwanted children are doomed to unloved, terrible lives.
If we agree that unwanted children would have been better off aborted, why don't we look at all that are alive right now and start killing them? And which of those unwanted unborn are certain to live an unloved life, anyway? Should only women who promise to give their child terrible lives have abortions? And what if we murder an unborn who would have had a good life?
If the argument is that we do abortions out of compassion, why not survey all who have lived terrible lives and see if they would have preferred to be ripped apart in their mother's womb. ' Bryan Platt, Eagle Point
Our last best chance
Global problems such as the safety of nuclear energy plants and the storage of nuclear wastes, pollution of air, rivers, and oceans, over-fishing and climate change cannot be dealt with by individual nations. A world government is needed but is too dangerous and also politically impossible.
There is, however, an effective way to confront these global problems: functionalism. Functionalism is defined as taking each dimension of national life that has international implications. such as air pollution, and turning it over to an international regulatory agency.
— The key to functionalism is that all countries must sign a binding agreement to follow the policies of the regulatory agency, as well as permit inspectors to operate within their borders without interference. By signing this agreement, nations only give up control of particular issues. In return they gain uniform global regulation that would benefit everyone on earth.
In a system of functionalism an agency only deals with a single issue, in effect providing the benefits of a world government without the risks such concentrated power would entail. This little-known and awkwardly named idea may be humanity's last best chance for dealing with the global issues that threaten our future. ' Scott V. Swearingen, Grants Pass
In reference to A New Axis of Evil article, (Mail Tribune March 12, Page C1) regarding the pro-gay agenda. A true story about a pair of male penguins that adopt an egg, a purple Teletubby that carries a purse, and the relationship between SpongeBob and Patrick are all cited as examples of the gay community trying to push their values onto the rest of us.
I think Falwell, Dobson, and the rest of the political radical Christian right movement should be jumping all over Bush for pushing gay rights. Didn't I see a photograph of him holding hands with Crown Prince Abdullah! Come on folks, you are starting to sound like McCarthy and his commie-under-every-bed insanity. ' Walt Wright, Medford
Bush right on ports
I almost never agree with Mr. Bush: I think the man is an utter tool. However, I'm inclined to take his side on the Dubai Ports issue. Given the ports were foreign-operated to begin with, where's the issue? I can pin the issue down to one single word: racism.
It was well and good when our ports were run by P&O from nice, white, non-Muslim Britain, but when those dangerous terro-I-mean-Arabs who have been successful port owners for decades wanted to run more ports, we all jumped up and down in a frenzy. Dubai is to the Muslim world as Los Angeles is to the U.S. ' a freewheeling place of pleasure, business, shipping, and great wealth. It's hardly a hotbed of Islamist fundamentalism. Meanwhile, Chinese companies operate seaports all over the place, and nobody bats an eye.
This deal's dead, or at least obfuscated enough that our attention will flit to some other nonsense, but it's worthwhile for us to take a look at why we reacted to this the way we did. 9/11 has caused us to act irrationally for long enough. Right here we did it again, and nobody bothered to raise their voice and say wait a second! Shame on us. Again. ' Mike Ely, Ashland
Give it to schools
Inadequate school funding issues continue to impact our community's schools. It's fortunate that our state legislators have the opportunity to channel some &
36;45 million in excess lottery proceeds to our elementary, junior and high schools.
Please urge your legislators to dedicate these funds to schools. For Medford's 549C district, these monies could total &
36;1million! With that money, we could alleviate some over-crowded classes! Our children deserve the best educational experience we can give them. By the way, these funds are not subject to the kicker law. ' Cyndi Mathews, Medford