Readers
In a man’s world, U.S. women have a voice
Re: Donald J. Williams’ April 8 rebuttal (“Editorial column is one person’s opinion”) to Billie Stanton’s April 1 column (“Women’s choice, not lawmakers’ “):
In my opinion, women do not choose abortion as a form of contraception.
But why is it that the loudest voices against abortion are men?
Could it be that men want it both ways, just like the woman who changed herself into a man but kept her reproductive parts intact and has had two children?
Why are these same men’s voices not heard when women and children are sexually abused by men?
What about the man who kept his own daughter in the basement and kept on raping her? As a result, children were conceived by incest.
What about the new law in Afghanistan that allows a husband to rape his wife?
I can just imagine that woman feeling ever so blessed, carrying a child while she’s plowing the poppy fields. Yes, let’s have more child labor.
Well, Mr. Williams, you don’t want your tax money to be used by state universities for abortion, but I don’t want my tax money to be used in wars and for the military-industrial complex.
Maybe Sarah Palin should have put a chastity belt on her daughter while she was in high school practicing her mother’s idea of abstinence.
Planned Parenthood, keep up your good work of education in sexual behavior.
Killing is killing. Mr. Williams should read the analysis in the Tucson Citizen on April 8 (“The next massacre – Expect more mass shootings as gloom, guns mix”).
LOIS M. SPEAKMAN
What’s not covered at Outdoor Expo
The April 7 letter from Julianne French (“Game & Fish reined in free speech at expo”) had many misrepresentations.
She inaccurately asserts that a wild horse rescue group was improperly denied a booth at the Arizona Game & Fish Department’s recent Outdoor Expo, and that wildlife and burros are nongame wildlife.
The department is mandated to inform the public about wildlife and department activities.
The expo accomplishes this mandate through exhibits about hunting, fishing, recreational shooting, archery, off-highway vehicles, watercraft recreation, wildlife conservation and other activities directly related to department responsibilities.
The horse rescue group, like others, was denied a booth because its activities are unrelated to the expo’s purpose.
Ms. French’s claim that Game & Fish improperly “repressed” the group’s free speech is inaccurate.
As she was advised, the expo was not a public forum with absolute First Amendment protection.
In the context of wildlife management, use of the word “wildlife” is not a matter of personal preference; it is a term in law.
Wild horses and burros are not considered wildlife under Arizona law, and federal courts interpreting the Wild, Free-roaming Horses and Burros Act recognize that horses and burros are not wildlife.
The department has no management authority over them; that authority rests with the federal government.
Finally, Ms. French inaccurately characterizes state Game & Fish Director Larry Voyles’ recent testimony before a House subcommittee as “opposition” to increased protection for wild horses and burros.
Mr. Voyles, as the invited representative of the Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies, articulated the challenges that HR 1018 would present for wildlife habitat protection.
He offered recommendations to help ensure a viable future for horses, burros and wildlife.
A transcript of his testimony can be found at www.azgfd.gov/ w_c/WildHorseBurro.shtml.
Gary Hovatter
assistant director
Arizona Game & Fish Department
Phoenix
A lesson on source of education funding
So the Arizona Supreme Court says school vouchers are unconstitutional?
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the voucher program in Cleveland is constitutional because public money can flow to private or sectarian schools as a result of a person’s independent choice.
Federal and state governments already provide billions of dollars in support to religiously affiliated organizations such as hospitals, universities and social service providers.
Government vouchers for low-income parents exist to help fund day care at private and parochial facilities.
In addition, thousands of students in higher education use federally funded Pell grants and GI Bill benefits to attend religious colleges and universities.
Simple reasoning tells you teachers unions and special interest groups who are trying to stop vouchers are working for teachers, not children.
Teachers unions are bitterly opposed to any reform lessening their power, and they have acquired enormous political and financial strength that they will devote to defeating any attempt to adopt a voucher system.
It would result in a loss of their control.
Public schools are not free and are not paid for by the government!
They’re paid for with taxpayers’ money, our money. We have the right to choose how our money is spent on the education of our children.
Spring Theobald
Maricopa
Letters to the editor