Sounding off: There's no 'choice' when others are threatened

“Covid is not fatal to children.” Let the shamefulness of that statement, which appeared in the letter “Penn Hills mask ruling decried” sink in for a moment. To back this claim up, the writer noted that deaths among children aged 0-18 were 423 as of late August (it’s now 470, according to the latest CDC data). Obviously, the argument immediately collapses — if covid can cause death in children, then it is by definition potentially fatal.

The writer neglected to mention the toll covid can take on children, even when it is not fatal. Thousands of kids have been hospitalized, and schools are closing.

The notion that mask requirements in schools take away parental choice is nonsensical. Of course it takes away parental choice — you don’t have the choice to send your child to school with a gun or a knife, either. You generally have to provide vaccination records. Most schools have dress codes. Taking away personal “choice” when that choice potentially threatens to harm others is just what living in a society is.

And to anyone who would say that covid isn’t fatal to children — tell that to the parents of kids who’ve died. I dare you.

Conor Demers, Penn Hills

Mandates vs. freedoms

I recently heard a friend say that company owners should have the freedom to mandate vaccines for their employees; after all, it is their company. This means that they should have the right to fire employees who are not vaccinated.

If you agree with this, you should also agree that employers should have the right to not hire or even fire employees that are vaccinated, since it is their company. Why stop there? Couldn’t you then also discriminate over religion, race, sex … ?

The same could be said for universities and schools. Students are being sent home for not being vaccinated. Couldn’t a student also be sent home if they are vaccinated? What about the millions of people who have the most beneficial immunity of all, natural immunity (because they had covid)? Should they be forced to get the vaccines or get fired/sent home?

Only time will tell who’s truly right in this battle against covid.

Mandates undo personal freedom. Freedom is still a civil right, isn’t it? These are challenging and divisive times where applying common sense and having discernment is critical. Personal freedom was mandated by our Founding Fathers, not the other way around.

Greg Weidner, New Kensington

Need answers from Amazon

Two questions need to be answered about the Amazon project that may be in Churchill (“Debate continues over possible Amazon site in Churchill”). Why does Amazon need this place so badly? Is Amazon not doing fine in the Pittsburgh area with its current facilities?

The other question is, what if this place turns out to be a flop? Ten years from now, Amazon may find a new way to distribute that does not include Churchill. Because Amazon goes through so many employees, it may “cycle through” so many people that it has a hard time finding anyone to work for the company. Amazon itself could go bankrupt or out of business.

Then Churchill is stuck with a huge building that needs guarded, with a lot of runoff causing flooding, and other companies have their own facilities and likely will not want it. Who will pay to demolish it? It’s a worse situation than now, because the green space absorbs a lot of stormwater, and the paved areas are smaller.

That is why I say I do not want Amazon in this area.

Robert J. Connor, Penn Hills

What’s happened since Biden took office

On Jan. 20 of this year, a new president took office. I have noticed that gas prices are soaring, illegal immigrants are somehow entering our country in record numbers (illegal is not legal), and nobody wants to work for a living while collecting free money and benefits from our government for doing nothing. Honest-working people just trying to survive cannot sustain lazy people’s attitudes too long.

Also, the new president struggles at times just to talk. He has problems trying to explain things and seems to have no answer for what has happened in Afghanistan other than blaming the previous president.

Don Handley, Hempfield

What’s a living wage?

The editorial “PNC Bank shows how market forces drive minimum-wage growth” raises some questions:

What number is considered a “living wage”?

Is a living wage for a family of four to be more than that of a single person?

Are fast-food workers entitled to the same wage as trained registered nurses?

Is a widow living on $12,000 per year from Social Security entitled to more benefits?

Wouldn’t the cost of living increase with an increase in living wages?

What does the rich paying their “fair share” mean? How much income classifies one as rich?

Is it “fair” for 1% of U.S. taxpayers to pay for 40% of all federal taxes while 44% pay nothing? Or 20% of taxpayers paying 87% of the taxes? Shouldn’t tax burdens be “fair” and “equal”?

Doesn’t everyone enjoy tax-provided benefits of clean air, water, roads, safe bridges — even the 44% paying no federal taxes?

Who will pay for all the “free stuff” that we are told is a fundamental human right to our existence: health care, education, child care?

Are those providing the services for “free stuff” unpaid volunteers? If not, who pays their “living wage”?

Enlighten me in future editorials, as no one ever answers these questions.

David Scandrol, Lower Burrell

Suppressing our votes

In 2019, landmark bipartisan voting reforms became law in Pennsylvania, including “no excuse” mail-in voting: a rare instance of giving the people what they wanted. The measure was timely as a pandemic overtook the commonwealth and the nation the following year, impacting the ability of individuals to vote safely in person and for polling places to attract workers to toil for little money for a long day.

Now, 14 Republican members of the Legislature, including 11 who voted to allow mail-in voting ballots, have filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of that provision.

What has changed in two years? Simple: Mail-in voting did not provide the Republicans an advantage, and Donald Trump, the man who has hijacked the party and from whom most of today’s Republicans take marching orders, does not like the system.

These shameless elected politicians would return us to the most inefficient and expensive means of voting, one designed for the 19th century.

I hope my fellow Pennsylvanians will join me in remembering the parties to the lawsuit: Dan Moul (Adams), Barry Jozwiak and David Maloney (Berks), Barbara Gleim (Cumberland), David Zimmerman (Lancaster), Aaron Bernstine (Lawrence), Frank Ryan (Lebanon), Timothy Bonner (Mercer), Timothy Twardzik (Schuylkill), Kathy Rapp (Warren), Bud Cook (Washington), Bob Brooks (Westmoreland) and Mike Jones and Dawn Keefer (York). All of them represent Trump country rural areas.

Like their fellow Republicans in other states, their motivation is transparent: partisan politics and a desire to suppress the vote. They are anti- democratic hypocrites and frauds — menaces to democracy.

Oren Spiegler, Peters

We have responsibilities to each other

When I listen to the minority of Americans who are defiant and enraged anti-vacciners and anti-indoor-mask- wearers, I can’t help but think back to when I was a teenage boy, and I was listening to presidential candidate Robert Kennedy over my transistor radio saying that we need to talk about what kinds of responsibilities we have to each other in this country.

Yes, we really do.

Stewart B. Epstein, Rochester, N.Y.

The writer is a former Squirrel Hill resident who taught at West Virginia and Slippery Rock universities.