Advertisement

Letters to the editor

July 30, 2004

Inexcusable extermination


To the editor:

We abhor the tragedy of the Holocaust and its weapon of mass destruction, the gas chamber. Yet our Supreme Court justices, with just the flick of a pen, signed the death warrant, Roe v. Wade, for the extermination of generations of humanity. Now, even after 30 years, the deliberate and vicious destruction of human life, man's inhumanity to man, rages relentlessly.

Our Supreme Court justices have been blessed with longevity and achievement; yet they have sanctioned the denial to millions upon millions of the unborn the right to even see the light of day.

Rather than being intent upon dying with their robes on, our justices could do better to consider cramming for their own finals as they ride into the sunset.

Advertisement

Mary D. Brady
Hagerstown




Please return prized wreath


To the editor:

I moved here from Frederick five years ago. Generally speaking, I have enjoyed this city and its surrounding countryside. But recently the most hurtful and cruel thing ever done to me occurred.

Last July, I lost my beautiful daughter Christina, the owner of Curves for Women, in an automobile accident. She loved crafts and had her own crafts business on the side. One of my cherished memories was a wreath she made for me. It was straw with a wintry theme, Teddy bear and ABC blocks.

It also had a little silver "old" washtub hanging in the middle. To the person who stole it off my front door by cutting the wire it was hanging from, I feel sorry for you. I'm sure you'll get your just "reward." I just want to let you know how precious that was to me and the sentimental value. That was cruel. Hopefully, someone will notice it or I will. I feel I have lost a piece of me.

Hopefully, the person who took it will understand their error and return it. I'd even excuse you and pay you. It means that much.

Wouldn't it be wonderful in a world filled with so much hate, cruelty and concern that one person would say I did the wrong thing, but I'll make it right? God bless my daughter on the anniversary of her passing.

Mike Fling
Hagerstown




Marriage issue a smoke screen


To the editor:

In order to avoid addressing the important issues facing this country, President Bush and his religious supporters are turning public attention to the absurd matter of homosexual marriage. They constantly talk about the "sanctity" of marriage when there is no such thing.

It is a well-known statistic that half of all marriages end in divorce - how are they sanctified? But what about the other 50 percent that do not end in divorce? They all eventually end in death, but this hardly means they are all happy and long-lasting. If a husband or wife murders his or her partner, their marriage nevertheless is counted as one of the 50 percent of successful marriages.

If a rejected suitor kills a newlywed at the end of the ceremony, meaning the marriage lasted less than five minutes, that marriage is still counted as successful. People are constantly dying (war, auto accidents, illness, murder, legal execution, industrial accident, etc.), so there is no minimum time span for those 50 percent "good" marriages.

And just because a couple does not get divorced does not mean they are happy. Look at all the spousal abuse, alcoholism, etc., found in so many marriages, yet they stay together out of fear, financial need, religious intimidation, "for the children," masochism and other often-ridiculous reasons.

Where is the "sanctity" in these marriages? If you were to check the marriage announcements in the paper 20 years ago and then trace all those couples, it is doubtful if more than 20 percent are still intact and happy, and it could easily be only 10 percent. And this is the institution the religious types are trying to "protect"? All things considered, why does anyone really care if marriage is extended to homosexuals?

But it is a good way to avoid addressing Bush's rotten record.

W. Bernard Randolph
Hagerstown




Don't delay elections


To the editor:

Let me get this straight. The Bush administration, which is in office only because the Supreme Court stopped the vote recount in Florida in 2000, is now discussing ways to delay the 2004 election.

In November 2001, Rudy Guiliani proposed delaying the election of his successor as New York's mayor for a year after the 9/11 attacks "because I love this city." Was Guiliani's proposal a trial balloon for an attempt by the Bush administration to do the same thing this November?

If we allow the terrorists to disrupt our democracy in this most fundamental way, then they - and the Bush administration - would be the winners. The Bush administration didn't protect us from 9/11 - don't let them use terrorism now to damage or destroy our democracy.

Tell your congressman and senators: "Don't mess with my government!"

Philip K. Edwards
Warfordsburg, Pa.

The Herald-Mail Articles
|
|
|