Sunday, December 8, 2013
I have been astounded at the current Republican "war on women" that has been occurring in various states and now on a national level.
Bishop Richard Malone speaks at an anti-abortion rally on the steps of the State House in Augusta in 2007.
The Associated Press
The most recent example of this war is the proposed bill by U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., that would restrict the abortion options of women in the District of Columbia.
What I found further astounding is the apparent lack of any response on the part of Democratic legislators to this war.
I am wondering why there have been no laws proposed requiring men to have prostate exams before being able to purchase Viagra or Cialis, or why there is no consideration of laws requiring all men aged 16 to 35 to carry condoms rather than having unprotected sex that might lead to the need for an abortion.
It strikes me that none of the problem pregnancies for which women may seek abortions are the product of virgin conceptions. There are men involved. Why are no politicians addressing that aspect of what pregnancy involves? And I further wonder how this war on women is related to the Republican emphasis on the need for more jobs in this country, except for increasing the need for additional ob/gyn jobs.
William J. Leffler II
Leading feminists and President Obama are opposing a Republican effort to ban gender-selecting abortions. This practice involves a pregnant woman deciding that she will only allow the child to be born if it is a particular gender.
Cases of gender-selecting abortions are overwhelmingly about parents who want boys, not girls. This occurs in India, China and other places where boys will carry on the family name as well as care for parents in their old age.
Girls will depart their birth family and will then serve their husband's family. Self-interest makes a boy more useful to his parents.
Several officials from Planned Parenthood were recently caught on video conniving with mothers to abort their babies if they developed female sexual characteristics in the womb. While these employees were disciplined or fired, their attitude seems to convey institutional support for abortion under any circumstances.
In the same week that Obama won endorsement by Planned Parenthood, he and congressional Democrats vigorously campaigned against any restriction on abortion.
How could anyone who is genuinely interested in the well-being of women support Obama or the feminists ever again? How could anyone give credence to people who mouth platitudes about their support of women while simultaneously allowing countless baby girls to die, just because they were female?
Obama and the feminists are not merely engaged in hypocrisy. In the name of their blind support for abortion, they are actively encouraging eugenics. This willingness to cheapen human life in service to ideology is a step onto a road that in the 1930s and 1940s led to genocide. People of all political convictions must look clearly at this issue and say, "No! Never again!"
Ralph K. Ginorio
New Dechaine trial will allow justice to be done
I have just read the article "In 23 years, 2,000 exonerations" in The Portland Press Herald (May 21). To me, the article screams out, "Look closely at the Dennis Dechaine case."
The article says, "there's usually someone to blame for the underlying tragedy, often more than one person, and the common culprits include defense lawyers as well as police officers, prosecutors and judges. In many cases, everybody involved has egg on their face."
(Continued on page 2)