ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Molly Yard, RIP

| Tuesday, Sept. 27, 2005

If anyone had the least doubt about whether the anti-abortion movement is motivated more by hatred of women than love of children, that doubt was shredded by the vile comments of so-called pro-life leader Mary Lou Gartner, who took the occasion of Molly Yard's death to attack her character ( "Feminist was force in local, U.S. politics," Sept. 22 and TribLIVE.com).

Gartner, who certainly never knew Molly Yard and probably never even met this courageous and generous woman, shows her own ignorance and sexism in her comments about Molly missing what "true womanhood was all about."

Molly Yard, mother of three, grandmother of five, married to her loving husband for 57 years until his death, role model and mentor to women worldwide, should have been lauded by the so-called family values crowd. But because Molly urged women to be their best and make their own choices and because she fought valiantly and well against any and all barriers to women's choices, Gartner and her ilk instead vilify and attack.

I was proud to know Molly Yard and to serve her when she was alive. Neither I nor the millions of other spiritual daughters of Molly will permit the pro-hate movement to insult her in death.

Jeanne K.C. Clark
Shadyside

The writer is a former national press secretary of the National Organization for Women.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.

click me