Bails for babies
The Jan. 6 letter by Johnnie Cancelarich, pro-life chairman, promotes the Jan. 22 celebration of “Bells for Babies” to remember the 50 million aborted fetuses accumulated since Roe vs. Wade.
The crime rate in Romania increased dramatically about 20 years after its dictator banned abortion. The unwilling mothers resented their children and failed to provide good homes. In contrast, here in the U.S. a dramatic drop in crime rates in the ’90s followed 20 years after the legalization of abortion.
This liberalization made choice available even to poor women who could barely afford adequate contraception much less the emotional and financial burden of providing a loving home.
It would be ideal if every child could grow up wanted and loved, but this is not an ideal world. The last thing we need now would be the magical reincarnation of 50 million deprived, unwanted, angry and resentful citizens itching for revenge. It’s bad enough that some portion of our criminal population is entitled to the excuse that their violence is merely an acting out in response to an ugly childhood, and it is for these offenders that I would ask the state to step in with funds to allow them to be free while awaiting trial.
Let’s call it “Bails for Babies.”
I could not resist responding to the Jan. 5 letter, “Radiation is real threat.”
The writer brought back some childhood memories when my mother took me to buy shoes. The idea of the x-ray machines was a feature to bring customers in so as to say, if you don’t think these are the proper fit, I might have a larger size that will be a little more comfortable. Of course, at a little more money.
If we are going to nit-pick on airport security, then we must identify the items that have been talked about on TV as well as the tabloid media in the past. Let’s take, for instance, the person who sits in front of a computer screen for several hours a day and then goes home to do the family budget, look up recipes, do a little gossip for a few hours and then might feel a little lump on her breast after a few years on the job. Let’s also take the microwave oven used for an hour or two later in the evening. Is it possible that might be another problem in the future?
As for airport security, are we to do away with it and risk another 9-11?
I want to commend the BDN for its excellent editorial regarding the lack of knowledge of today’s students of this country’s history.
A perfect example of this is George Washington, our greatest American who is fast disappearing as the nation’s top icon. If it were not for him, we would not have the nation we know today. Yet many Americans don’t fully appreciate the debt of gratitude we owe the Father of Our Country.
Incredible as it may seem, many young Americans don’t even know whose likeness appears on the dollar bill. Sadly, the New York Times reported March 26, 2006, that schools across the country are cutting the number of hours students spend studying history. Many college students cannot even name the war in which Wash-ington won our freedom. In one survey of seniors in the top 50 universities, only 34 percent knew that it was General Washington who defeated Cornwallis at Yorktown.
When I was growing up, America celebrated Washington’s birthday every year on Feb. 22. But these days we celebrate something called Presidents Day.
How can we hope to teach our children to cherish this nation when there is not one day of the year when we pay tribute to the man who single-handedly held the American Revolution together at Valley Forge, when all hope of victory seemed lost after the disastrous New York Campaign of 1776 in which the British were victorious?
It is a disgrace that many American children are being raised with far less respect, reverence, or even knowledge of our greatest American hero, let alone our history in general.
Dee C. Brown Jr.
• • •
There will be many candidates running for governor in the coming year and they will be touting such innovations as renewable energy, green jobs, wind turbines, and solar power.
First of all, we don’t need energy. We have plenty of it. I have yet to run into a light switch that doesn’t turn on a light or fire up my computer. The term green jobs makes everyone feel good; but how many people in your family are making a hearty living in a green job?
We need real jobs in Maine. Wind turbines are expensive and profit somebody, but not you living in Maine and there is not enough sun in Maine to make solar feasible for big-time energy needs. Besides we already have energy. We always have.
You will hear candidates say they are moderates. The term moderate means, “I really don’t take a stand on anything, but I will be happy to spend your tax dollars unwisely.” Don’t vote for a moderate candidate, because nothing will happen.
The people in Maine seriously need to change their voting habits. The state has a $438 million deficit because of the way we vote. If we don’t change our votes there is not going to be a state of Maine to live in.
Economic death wish
Trade with Canada, which does some things we won’t do ourselves, makes sense. However, with Maine’s potential for power generation that has being neglected, it should be embarrassing and wrong that we have to depend on Canada for electric power.
Examples of opportunities squandered: full hydro potential from our great rivers and abandonment of Maine Yankee nuclear power on a Chicken Little emotional overreaction. Even our electric transmission here is owned by a Canadian outfit.
For example, Wyoming actively develops its bountiful natural energy resources. If Maine had these we would probably bar development. It’s like we have an economic death wish. We excessively wring our hands over environmental issues and expect others to provide for us. That’s elitist, costly, and selfish to our detriment.
We fall for subsidized “energy lite” fixes. Speaking from a 40-year, real-world engineering degree perspective, I do not believe that wind and solar can compete with large-scale energy intensive (industrial strength) sources essential to a modern society. I bet that new nuclear developments will make obsolete existing approaches as technology progresses. France is already ahead of us, supplying 70 percent of their power with conventional nuclear reactors.
• • •