Advertisement

Letters to the Editor 3/18 Part 3

March 19, 2001

Letters to the Editor 3/18 Part 3



Downtown clinic a good idea



To the editor:

I agree with Bob Borngresser about putting a Betty Ford Clinic in the Y.M.C.A. building in downtown Hagerstown. I lived in Washington County for 37 years before moving to Greencastle. I know there is very good supply of drunks frequenting your city.

You all could put together a Mickey Mouse brigade to collect drunks around midnight. You could go right to Washington Street, that would give the old folks living in the apartments something to do besides watching people get shot across the street. Then you could go down Franklin Street and collect them as they come out of the gin mills. Next take a lap out the Dual Highway. Because no matter how rich or poor you are, when you stagger from the bar you are just a plain drunk.

If you charged the drunks a good size amount for spending the night at the Betty Ford Clinic (you know what I mean), the name tank would do. Why get fancy? You know it would give the kids something to do - they could line up like watching the parade. Maybe they could put out chairs, or even pay to watch the excitement. And you know you would be doing the service clubs a great favor. Only one is in the city limits. People would go to them then and the gaming commission would collect more money from jars and then charity organizations would get some loot. If you have any room left in the tank, maybe the sheriff's department can get in on the act and grab the drunks in the county.

Advertisement

You probably would collect enough money to put more bodies on the police force and catch them bad kids cruising the Dual. If the city council miss out on this money maker you ought to throw them all out of office.

And it is like Bob Borngresser said, a great idea.

Alice Hawks

Greencastle, Pa.




Poor record for women's rights



To the editor:

Are women human beings? Do human rights extend to women worldwide? Are we humans really intelligent?

Fifty years ago in a British hospital, the wife of an African chieftain came in to be fitted with a diaphragm, as she did not want any more children.

My friend in the GYN clinic was unable to do this, as she was all sewn up. She would have to have been cut open every time she gave birth and whenever she had sexual intercourse. A great way to keep women abstinent. What about the men?

Oprah has done several shows lately on violence to women, and showed some very graphic photos of the above female genital mutilation.

Little girls are cut with an unsterile razor, without anesthetic. Those that do not die from bleeding or infection, are deemed to be marriageable.

In countries like Bangladesh and India, if a girl rebuffs a man, he can throw acid to destroy her face so no one else will want her and nothing happens to the man.

Third World and refugee women have no recourse when raped.

In 1995 representatives from 179 nations met in Beijing, China, to discuss the links between women's rights, human rights and environmental preservation.

Last year in New York, international NGO's met again to discuss the Platform of Action to empower and educate women everywhere, essential to preserving life on our planet as we know it.

Ruth M. Davis

Waynesboro, Pa.




Pa. Intersection is confusing



To the editor:

The letter on the Opinion page titled by The Herald-Mail as "Police were in the right" proves the contention that the press does promote biased opinions in the public eye. It appears that what was reported in the paper (on the accident in which a police officer died on I-81) has biased at least one reader to the point of emotionally attacking another.

The recent writer is the one using his "ax" to attack the earlier one, who sought to avoid prejudicing the position of a comatose accident victim entitled to police protection of his Constitutional right to a fair trial under the presumption "innocent until proven guilty."

The reporting in the paper clearly created a biased view initially, by reporting more "facts" favoring the police, without equally addressing the position of the 19-year-old. Even the titling (by the paper) "Police were in the right" supports the "view" of the one personally attacking a writer who raises a valid question of fairness of the paper's biased policy to induce unreasoned opinion.

True, it's a fact that one passenger in the police cruiser had his life snuffed our needlessly, while another suffered injury. But aren't police accountable for protecting their passengers and others on the road? It is sad that anyone has to die doing his job, whatever it may be, but is it fair to condemn another victim lying in a coma, unable to defend himself, when two drivers are involved? As time passes, the paper is discovering more facts which may mitigate the guilt of the defenseless victim, but will these receive "front page exposure"?

The Herald-Mail Articles
|
|
|