Sounding off: If abortion is outlawed, who will take care of the babies? |
Letters to the Editor

Sounding off: If abortion is outlawed, who will take care of the babies?

Protesters for women’s rights hold a rally on the Alabama Capitol steps to protest a law making abortion a felony in nearly all cases with no exceptions for cases of rape or incest, Sunday, May 19, 2019, in Montgomery, Ala.

“Heartbeat ban” is an attempt to outlaw abortion. At least 15 states to date are trying to enact laws that ban abortion as early as six weeks of gestation or when a heartbeat can be heard. Most women don’t even know they are pregnant six weeks into a pregnancy.

My question is, who’s going to take care of all the unwanted babies? Are all those evangelical groups or religious folks going to care for the babies? And who’s going to help the mothers through the pregnancies or after the babies are born?

Single poor mothers get slammed for being on any type of government assistance. No one wants to help them. So now you want them to have more babies because it’s morally right with your religious beliefs? When these women need help, they are criticized and ostracized by the same religious groups or individuals. They are damned if they do have the child and damned if they don’t.

No one religious group has the right to impose its religious beliefs on others. No man, woman or religious group has the right to rule over women’s bodies.

All single males who believe abortion is not morally and religiously right for women should all practice abstinence or get vasectomies. That would put a stop to millions of unexpected, unwanted pregnancies each year.

Yes, I believe what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Robin Hammonds, Manchester

Stopping school shootings

The NRA called yesterday. It was my choice not to answer the phone; however, yesterday was different. I was listening to the news regarding the Colorado school shooting and firsthand accounts from students. I opted to answer the phone knowing it was the NRA. I asked how could they call anyone on the day of another school shooting. There was stunned silence.

When Westmoreland County Commissioner Gina Cerilli commented that she was for the Second Amendment and gun ownership, Republicans were furious. Only Republicans are for the Second Amendment and gun ownership.

Let me be perfectly clear: I as a Democrat support the Second Amendment and do not want to take away your guns. What I want is to take away bump stocks, increase the age of gun ownership to 21 and institute background checks before purchasing a gun even at gun bashes. I want support for mental health programs and education for parents and the public about signs of mental health issues and how to treat children with mental health problems before they become incarcerated for a mass murder at school, and a reporting system when someone is exhibiting signs of hurting others similar to ChildLine.

Our children are our future, and school shootings have become the norm. This newspaper doesn’t even make it front-page news.

Anita Leonard, Hempfield

Abstinence is control

In response to Georgia’s “heartbeat” bill, pro-abortion activist and occasional actress Alyssa Milano has exhorted her social media followers to engage in a #sexstrike. “Our reproductive rights,” says she, “are being erased. Until women have legal control over their bodies we just cannot risk pregnancy.”

Apparently, abstinence is the sole form of control women have over their bodies that in all instances prevents unintended pregnancies.

I applaud Ms. Milano for her powerful stance in support of this fresh, progressive idea. In fact, instruction in the specifics of this novel approach to pregnancy prevention should be incorporated into high school curricula everywhere.

Julie Rebitch, Salem

Suggestions for new laws for Pennsylvania

The following was sent to Gov. Tom Wolf:

Dear Sir,

As our Pennsylvania state governor, please consider the following laws that would benefit the voting citizens of Pennsylvania:

1. Voting citizens 65 years of age and older can vote via mail if they choose without having a medical problem or involving a medical professional.

2. The DD214 form or military discharge will be recognized as valid identification for Pennsylvania, including the Department of Motor Vehicles and other state agencies.

3. A homestead law to protect homeowners from losing their homes to creditors. This law should be similar to the Texas homestead law.

4. Borough, city and township secretaries should have in their posession candidate packages for various elections. Currently all ccandidates statewide must go to their respective county courthouses to pick up candidate packets. This causes wasted energy and time and parking and traffic congestion. An amendment could be added to section 1111, page 11:5, 2014 edition, Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes.

Stephen M. Jurovic, Vandergrift

Where will immigrants live, work?

I couldn’t agree more with letter-writer Dwayne Buffer (“Pittsburgh’s homeless should come first,”). He says it like it is.

It sounds great for Democrats to spew about inviting with open arms thousands of illegal immigrants. Where are they going to stay, and more importantly, where are they going to work? If work is so plentiful, why not have people on welfare (food stamps) get the first opportunity? Of course, we know some of those people either don’t have the desire to work or think they are owed everything for free.

Bring in thousands of illegal immigrants to Pittsburgh and see what happens. Welfare for most and new housing? Guess who will pay? Another example of one-party domination for many years.

Recent out-of-town guests gently commented that despite the beautiful setting, they were shocked by litter and the unkempt conditions around Pittsburgh. I assured them that meant nothing, as long as you only thought Steelers!

A. Atkinson, Lower Burrell

Opposing Bill Peduto’s gun opposition

I oppose Mayor Bill Peduto’s opposition to the Pennsylvania Senate gun bill (“Bill Peduto, Philly mayor: Why we oppose Pa. Senate gun bill,”).

You say the bill “gives the gun lobby the ability to sue local governments … whenever they do not like a local gun law.” Obviously, you don’t remember a few years ago when Democrats in Congress tried passing a law giving local governments the ability to sue gun manufacturers for damage done by an inanimate object they had produced and sold in a free-market environment called America. Inanimate objects cannot think and/or operate themselves.

Democrats passed “gun-free zone” laws. Criminals don’t obey laws to begin with. Only a Democrat would think they would obey a new and different law. Have you noticed an increase in shootings in “gun-free zones” since the laws were passed?

Have you two shortsighted “officials” thought about how hard freedom of travel would become if a law-abiding gun owner possessing a government-issued concealed-carry permit had to navigate thousands of different oppressive “local government” gun laws, when all they wanted to do is to protect themselves and their families as they travel?

Enough babble about facts that Democrats can’t understand. I have a serious question for you. Why do Democrats tell people not to judge all Muslims by the radical acts of a few, but from the other side of the same mouth, tell the same people that they must judge all gun owners by the radical acts of a few?

Bill Herald, Venetia

REAL ID requirements daunting for seniors

By Oct. 1, 2020, Pennsylvanians will need a REAL ID-compliant license, identification card or other federally acceptable identification to board domestic commercial flights or enter military bases and federal facilities (“Here’s what you need to know about Real ID”).

First, you must prove identity with a certified, raised-seal birth certificate. If the birth certificate was issued many years ago and doesn’t have a raised seal, you must pay for one. If the name on it is one your parents provided at your birth but no one ever used, you have a problem. The name you have used for 80-plus years, which appears on countless documents, is not valid for proof of identity; Department of Motor Vehicles workers will tell you that you do not exist.

A woman who changed her names through marriage also needs to prove how she obtained the name she now uses. If you married 50 years ago and your first husband died 30 years ago, but you continued to use your first married name until you remarried, and that name appears on your present marriage certificate, you must provide both certificates.

Seniors are at a disadvantage in being able to supply all the required documentation. Documents can be lost in moving, or discarded through the years. The time, effort and cost of replacing them can be daunting.

The rationale behind REAL ID is that it will help to “protect the homeland.” It is right up there with the Transportation Security Administration requiring Grandma to remove her orthopedic shoes before being allowed to board a plane.

Joan Land Davi, Greensburg

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.