Letters to the editor, 05/14/06
Share with others:
The PG chose the wrong man in the Senate primary
I cannot for the life of me understand why the Post-Gazette editorial board would endorse Bob Casey in the U.S. Senate Democratic primary race ("Send Bob Casey," May 7 editorial). You listed name recognition as his greatest asset. Sure, that's a nice thing to have, but what about the issues, guys?
Don't you think the Democratic voters would rather have someone who is pro-choice, who is against the war in Iraq, who is against the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons, who doesn't have to pay back his contributors with votes once in office and who can set a new standard for Democratic leadership in Washington?
The only person who can possibly change the Democratic Party for the better in Washington, and the only person who can possibly take Rick Santorum to task for his transgressions against the American people, is Chuck Pennacchio. I have met the man, and there isn't a more qualified or more honest man running for Senate in the entire country, let alone in this particular race.
He is my choice, and he should have been yours, too.
JUSTIN MILLER
Ellwood City
Decisive issues
One of the many problems with your endorsement of Bob Casey Jr. for the U.S. Senate is that there are many issues that will decide who wins the May 16 primary. In addition to choice, the issues involve the war in Iraq (which Mr. Casey has no problem continuing), a potential war in Iran (where Mr. Casey would consider the use of nuclear weapons), stem-cell research (which he is against) and the confirmation of right-wing judges (Mr. Casey said he would have voted to confirm Samuel Alito), among others. Mr. Casey has said he will go to Washington and change things; with these views I don't see how that's possible -- with him it will be business as usual.
Rather than nurturing a grudge, which is an insulting dismissal of those with a different point of view, the two other candidates in the primary race, especially Chuck Pennacchio, are taking stands and offering concrete solutions to this country's problems. Mr. Pennacchio also brings to his campaign actual experience in Washington as an aide to Sen. Alan Cranston and Rep. Ron Dellums and an extensive knowledge of this country's history.
The Post-Gazette had an opportunity to endorse a candidate who would lead the Democrats to victory. Chuck Pennacchio is the only Democratic candidate in the U.S. Senate race who can take on Rick Santorum issue by issue. Mr. Casey's lack of campaign skills and Republican-lite views will only spell disaster in November.
HENRY LIPPUT
Bethel Park
The writer is a volunteer coordinator for Chuck Pennacchio.
Accountability call
Regarding "Riskier Days Ahead for Stodgy Foundations" (May 7): As one of 2,600 nonprofit organizations in Allegheny County, I applaud the foundations' assertiveness in holding organizations accountable for their budgets, as well as encouraging nonprofits to become more self-sufficient.
Answering the hard questions posed by foundations serves to strengthen the overall infrastructure and future sustainability of an organization. The fact that an organization is tax-exempt does not mean that it is exempt from operating the business in an efficient and socially responsible manner. For-profit or nonprofit, our customers have a right to expect that we engage in ethical business practices. In fact, the first statement in the Donor's Bill of Rights declares that a donor has the right "to be informed of the organization's mission, of the way the organization intends to use donated resources and of its capacity to use donations effectively for their intended purposes."
Regarding David Bergholz's comments about the "fair-weather friends" who had "cut and run" when the schools needed their support: This "public and heavy-handed" approach opened the eyes of many nonprofit leaders. However harsh, this action resulted in a change in the way that many nonprofit organizations, and their boards, operate. Not only are nonprofits more cognizant of the way they are spending philanthropic dollars, but they also are taking a closer look at what would happen if funding were cut off tomorrow and the need to have self-sustaining programs in place to ensure continuity of service to their constituents.
DAVID M. MOSEY
Executive Director
Smart Futures
Downtown
Selfish women
I'm writing about the series "When Mom's Behind Bars" (May 7-8). You know, this really makes me mad -- it's always about them. What about the children and other family members? They are the ones hurting and embarrassed by these women's actions. Yet everyone says "let's feel sorry for them." Well, you know what? They are the ones doing the hurting; they are the ones who put themselves in this place.
I don't feel a bit sorry for them. The children and spouses and other family members are the ones who should be getting all the support and help, not these people. They think of only themselves, now and forever, trust me.
T. PAWLOS
Crafton
Not real 'moms'
How inappropriate that a week before Mother's Day, we had to be subjected to front-page coverage of "When Mom's Behind Bars" (May 7-8). Are we going to see the same as Father's Day nears? Oh, you bleeding hearts!
I don't have any sympathy for any woman who says, "I love heroin as much as my child." I'll never understand all the "do-gooders" who support these creatures of habit.
Why don't you honor those who work along with their husbands, sometimes at two jobs, to support their children and grandchildren?
Alcoholics and drug addicts who have to do anything to support their habits belong where they'll end up -- on the obituary page.
Any woman can have children and be called "Mother"; it takes a loving, caring, responsible woman to be called "Mom."
PATRICIA WILKESON
Robinson
The same cause
In the May 7 Forum piece "Faith Into Action," the author suggests that since Jesus did not directly speak out against abortion that somehow the issue was not as important to him as caring for the poor, about which he spoke often. A reading of the Gospels reveals Jesus' intense love for every human life.
Jesus says in John 13:34, that we should "love one another, as I have loved you." Do we love children by destroying them? Jesus calls for love, mercy and justice all through the Gospels. These teachings contradict the termination of innocent life.
Perhaps Jesus doesn't specifically mention abortion because it was a settled matter. God speaks out against sacrificing children to idols (Ezekiel 16:20-21). Some people in the Old Testament allowed their children to be burnt to death as offerings, sacrificing them to idols.
Our idols today are financial convenience, professional advancement, social acceptance, "choice" and whatever other reason a mother might select to sacrifice her unborn child. The difference between the human sacrifice of the Old Testament and today is that we sacrifice the children before they leave their mothers' wombs.
Christians have a heritage of care for the world's poor. The author's assertion that the protection of the unborn is less important is unfounded. A Christian's call to support the sanctity of human life means that stopping abortion and serving the poor are the same cause.
JAMES CLARK
Bethel Park
Similar tragedies might be avoided if we reached out to infant caregivers
When I read the article "Nanny Sentenced for Shaking Boy" (May 3) and the subsequent letter ("No More Tragedies," May 9), I felt my heart break for the parents. But I felt sorry for young Sara Miller, too. I doubt that she ever wanted to hurt a baby, yet she has to live knowing that she did and that she can never undo it.
Caring for young children is neither simple nor easy. As I recall, when my three children were infants, I loved them beyond reason, yet I was frustrated, exhausted, emotionally and physically drained, plus extraordinarily isolated. Day after day of that, and reasoned, thoughtful action can be conquered by a sense of desperation just this side of sanity. And that's with just one baby; I can't imagine how difficult it must be with twins.
I am not trying to excuse the inexcusable. I agree that everyone should be aware that shaking a baby is wrong, but education is not enough. We need to eliminate the isolation that intensifies the exhaustion and frustration. The sort of daily support that families provided when they lived next door is gone. That lack of support, I think, sets the stage for catastrophe, even among the well-informed.
Let it start with you. If you know a parent or caregiver with a new baby, reach out. Let her know that you're there if she needs you. A phone call, lunch out or a short break can overcome the isolation. It may seem simple, but it could be a lifesaver.
SUSY MORAN
Arlington
First Published May 14, 2006 12:00 am
