Jordan River Forum

Funding abortion an ongoing debate I agree with Cherry Blattert's column ("Don't subsidize abortion," May 20). Abortion is the great moral question of today's culture, just as slavery was before the Civil War. This dilemma will not be resolved in the Showers Building, but Council chambers have recently contained a small skirmish in this ongoing debate since our elected representatives of 1999 have given $8,400 of taxpayer dollars to the local branch of America's top abortion provider. Official "not-for-profit" status or not, Planned Parenthood is a political group lobbying for, and against, legislation and taking high-profile stands on public policy. If the National Rifle Association asked the City Council for $2,000 for gun safety classes, just as Planned Parenthood did two years ago for teen education, should the City Council vote to approve the NRA's request? Surely, being able to safely handle firearms is a laudable goal for people who intend to own them, but city government has no business giving money to a political group. Note that the courts have upheld the constitutionality of the right to bear arms, just as they have upheld the constitutionality of the right to choose abortion. Planned Parenthood's letter to the City Council states that the sterilizing machine they plan to buy with $1,500 of the people's money will not be used for any equipment used in abortions. But to many Bloomington citizens, giving taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood is on the same level as giving money to the Ku Klux Klan -- no matter how much good the KKK would do with that money. It is true that there is not the consensus of negative views of Planned Parenthood in Bloomington that there is of the Klan. But why should the Council insult the core beliefs of so many of their constituents for the small sum of $1,500? Scott Tibbs
IU Alumnus '98 Higher legal authority on campus? I am very glad to know that we have a higher legal authority than the U.S. Supreme Court right here on the IU campus ("Don't subsidize abortion," May 20). If Ms. Blattert spent a little more time in class, and a little less at pro-life rallies, she would know that the Supreme Court decides what is and what is not unconstitutional, not her. The fact of the matter is, Roe v. Wade made the specific ruling that laws banning all abortions were unconstitutional by denying mothers their 14th amendment rights. If Ms. Blattert wants to encourage others to protest the City of Bloomington's support of Planned Parenthood, that is her right. However, she shouldn't make erroneous statements about how laws are defined and who has the right to define them. Scott Six
Graduate student Bush did not fail the country I was pleased that the majority of the staff looked at the facts and said Bush did what he could ("Bush did all he could," May 20). But, I wonder how (Campus editor Meghan) Dwyer could think that Bush could've done more ("Bush should have done more," May 20). If she plans on blaming Bush, she needs to blame Clinton too. The attacks took two years to plan, and I'm sure he had plenty of hijacking warnings. The truth is any president gets 1,460 security briefings per presidential term. I would think a political science major would use a little more common sense than saying we need to alert everyone daily about hijack warnings -- which are the most common threat. Bush did not fail the country. When you have that many security threats, you have to pick and choose your warnings. Trying to blame the president for something he couldn't have prevented is sad. The truth is, anyone in that position probably would've acted the same way. We just have to face the fact that we're not invincible. Todd Usher
Senior Seatbelt crackdown out of control The national seatbelt crackdown is one indicator of how absurdly out-of-control government has become. Besides the $10 million for the national advertising campaign, taxpayers pay more than $100,000 per year for seatbelt enforcement in Monroe County alone. All this is to harass peaceful people who endanger no one else. What real crimes are being committed while officers earning overtime pay are standing around, delaying people during rush hour? What other work could those civil servants be doing in those 170 plus hours per year at double pay? But the grants from the Governor's Council on Impaired and Dangerous Driving stipulate that the money must be used for overtime hours on seatbelt enforcement, and officers are not allowed to work overtime for any other purpose. Why? Do recklessly unrestrained drivers increasingly threaten our community? Are children flying through windshields at alarming rates? No. The U.S. Department of Transportation admits that 97 percent of parents already obey childhood seatbelt laws. Yet national nannies deploy thousands of police officers, inconvenience millions and fine and jail some. When seat belt laws were first enacted in the 1980s, weren't we told they would only be enforced when someone is pulled over for another offense? Like most bad laws, they are not applied as intended, but extended to jeopardize civil liberties. We should all lobby Governor O'Bannon and Captain Diekhoff to put an end to this program. Especially with the alleged state budget crisis, all police resources should be applied toward keeping the peace, not hassling innocent people. Erin Hollinden
Vice President, IU College Libertarians Professors' judgments in question As an alumnus with two degrees from IUB, I was just wondering if the professors who so vehemently and verbally opposed Coach Knight will oppose Davis' raise with the same fervor. Will the English professor who was threatened and hated Bobby Knight so much protest this raise with as much zeal as if Coach Knight had received the same raise a few years ago? I am not justifying nor decrying the raise, just wondering if the professors who judged Coach Knight so critically will now be just as critical of Coach Davis. If not, can you spell hypocritical? John Gray
IU Alumnus '79 Support breast cancer research Recently, John Hostettler voted no to legislation for Breast Cancer Research in the U.S. House of Representatives. Fortunately at this time we had a majority of congressmen who opposed Mr. Hostettler's action and voted yes. A group of breast cancer survivors went to Washington and approached Mr. Hostettler on the subject of Breast Cancer Research. He replied that he stood by his no vote and the reason so many women have breast cancer is due to an abortion in their pasts. Research has made progress for the horrible disease that strikes both young and older women. We must join together as a people and put aside our thoughts and notions to help our sons and daughters, moms and dads, grandmas and grandpas with better treatments and I pray for a cure in the very near future. God bless us when we have such representation in congress. Darris Brown
Newburgh, Ind.