Make us your home page
Letters to the Editor

Ultrasound is a small price to pay to get an abortion

Bill attacks the right to abortion | April 7, editorial

Ultrasound is a small price to pay

It's obvious that nothing short of "abortion on demand" will satisfy the liberal editors of the Times. Anyone who is prolife is considered to be taking an extremist antiabortion position by this newspaper.

The strange thing is that the Times has called for a "live and let live" attitude, which to their way of thinking means don't hinder, impede, interfere or otherwise get in the way of an abortion.

However, if we had a "live and let live" attitude perhaps most of the 50-million babies who have been aborted since Roe vs. Wade might be with us today. Under the circumstances, getting an ultrasound is a small price to pay for taking an innocent life.

Louis Ciardulli, Safety Harbor

A needless burden

Again, lawmakers are attempting to legislate on women's medical decisions regarding reproductive rights. This legislation is merely a ploy to put yet another roadblock in the way of women who have made a decision to legally terminate a pregnancy.

As pointed out in the Times editorial, the measure will surely face a court challenge, which will cost the state legal fees. In addition, the cost of the ultrasound will be borne by the woman.

Make no mistake about it, this legislation is meant only to cause more consternation to women seeking an abortion. It is unnecessary, and concerned persons should protest it!

Eleanor Cecil, Tampa NOW, Lutz

Bill attacks the right to abortion | April 7, editorial

The argument for a right

to an abortion is flimsy

I never have understood the desire of so many women to abort their unborn children. Some 50-million unborn children have been aborted since Roe vs. Wade. Is it possible that so many women were victims of "rape, incest, domestic violence and human trafficking," four exceptions mentioned in the editorial? Even if so, were all of those children deserving of abortion? What of the women who aborted their unborn children who were not victims of rape, incest, domestic violence or human trafficking? What was their reason for aborting their child?

This argument of a woman's right to privacy because it's "her body" seems so thin compared to the fact that an innocent third party, the unborn child, becomes the victim of the woman's choice to end the pregnancy.

And because the tone of the editorial seemed to show such a personal and biased desire to have this bill defeated, I am further convinced that there is little justification for the total number of children who have been deprived of their right to live.

Richard Valentine, Palm Harbor

Head off the assault

At a time when we need our lawmakers to pay attention to the housing and mortgage crisis, the spiraling cost of gas, the recession and the continuing insurance problem, how are they spending their time and our money? They are spending hours debating how to make a legal medical procedure burdensome and expensive for the women of Florida.

We have Rep. Trey Traviesa, to thank for sponsoring HB 257, which requires doctors to perform an ultrasound on all women seeking an abortion. This bill does not promote either the health or welfare of women, nor does it support informed consent. It only makes abortion more expensive and difficult for women to legally obtain.

Here's hoping Gov. Charlie Crist steps in to head off this assault on the reproductive rights of women.

Lynn Yetman, Treasure Island

Bill attacks the right to abortion | April 7, editorial

A cheapening of life

Your editorial is symptomatic of our declining values in society and the awful, barbaric genocide of the unborn. I can't see anywhere in the Constitution where it says a woman has the right to kill her unborn baby as you claim. If our Legislature passes this bill it will ultimately save many defenseless, unborn human beings.

In a recent study of women who had abortions, more than 40 percent have said they regretted it and some said they did not realize what the gruesome procedure was doing to them and their bodies. It's no wonder that our country is rife with hate and murder. The cheapness of life, which your editorial staff espouses, has a ripple effect that says it's okay to take an innocent life. Shame on you.

Denis Farrell, St. Petersburg

Banking on Grand Prix's impact | April 7, story

Race is an imposition

The Times needs to learn the difference between "most," "many" and "some." This story in Monday's Metro section noted in the subheadline that "most business owners" welcome the Grand Prix. The next two paragraphs suggest that "many" or "a lot" of business owners made money during the Grand Prix.

Then the article itself contains specific reference to one liquor store (selling ways to sneak liquor into the race), one bar (which was half full) and one restaurant (which ran out of beer). The only other business specifically mentioned in the article was a restaurant that complained of lack of business Saturday.

Our city leaders have imposed this event on St. Petersburg with little or no study of its economic impact besides an optimistic belief that seeing the skyline on ESPN will help us all. The business owners I know and patronize every day complain the race kills business.

And as for me — a downtown resident living one block off the race course — I've learned to leave town for the weekend because the noise from the cars makes my home uninhabitable.

Mark Bauer, St. Petersburg

Critics say race glorifies speeding | April 5, story

A parent's job

I can understand that mothers are concerned about the influence that athletes have on their kids, but rather than blaming the sport of auto racing for corrupting children, why not blame the parents for allowing their kids to trick out their cars with high-output engines and nitrous injectors?

I can't drive through Tampa anymore without seeing a $1,500 Honda Civic with $10,000 in engine and exhaust modifications on it. No one puts these items on their cars to drive the speed limit.

A parent who allows their child to do that to their car is just asking for higher insurance rates and speeding tickets. The Times article on Saturday references a mother "whose 18-year old daughter was killed in a street race." Maybe instead of blaming the race for her daughter's death, the mother should take a good hard look in the mirror.

If children today are so stupid that they think that driving 200 mph on a closed course can translate to real life, might I suggest they make like Mike Alstott and plow their empty heads into a stationary object.

Adam Locascio, Land O'Lakes

Ultrasound is a small price to pay to get an abortion 04/08/08 [Last modified: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:51am]
Photo reprints | Article reprints


Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours