Sex | Safe Sex Better Than Abortion

Judy Schmidt, Kodak

Safe sex better than abortion

This is a response to the July 14 letter "Anti-abortionists punish women." No, abortion is not better than a child being born to unsuitable parents, even another Casey Anthony. Does the writer really value life so little?

Whether a child is killed by a negligent parent or in the womb, it is still killing a child. Neither is right. People seem to think if they kill another person things will get better. However, you just trade one set of problems for another set. Every action has consequences.

Women at whatever age need to think before they have sex. Sexual intercourse is what makes babies. Make a choice then not to have sex without taking precautions unless you want a baby and are ready for those consequences. Don't trust that your partner will protect you and provide safe sex. Be self-sufficient and protect yourself or don't have sex. If you become pregnant, then be an adult and deliver that baby. It's easier to live with being an adult than being a killer.

Anti-abortion is not to punish women. It's to have them think and not to kill. Why not be responsible adults? Rapes make up less than 5 percent of the abortions, or so I read. So abortions are just another form of birth control.

If women took more responsibility and had safe sex or were abstinent there would be no need for abortions or children to be given away.

The letter writer suggests that we could save the pain of the living for people in these circumstances. Then we should all die because we all live with suffering of one kind or another. Life is hard " the trick is to live it and be proud in the end that it wasn't at the expense of another.

Bob Paterick, Farragut

Tax cuts didn't create jobs

Our Congress debates job creation endlessly. Some like to champion the myth that cutting corporate taxes will create jobs. While this seems to make sense to some, it is just not entirely correct. The consumer-demand side of economics is just as important and makes things work. If they don't have the money to purchase, no smart business will supply goods or services.

The tax cuts for the wealthiest among us and the job creators during the George W. Bush administration have been in force for 10 years now " and where are the jobs?

Supply-side (economics) first needs consumer demand, and that is why I believe not enough jobs were created in 10 years.

Furthermore, how many jobs have professional athletes and the idle rich created during this time? I would think not too many. The fact is that the vast majority of the American people want this tax segment repealed. This does not raise taxes on lower-income taxpayers.

Based on historical results of the past administration, members of Congress should not expect a different outcome on jobs. It would make sense not to pursue the failed policy of the past. More creative thinking is needed.

Like it or not, the stimulus that Bush started, $700 billion, and that Obama agreed to and continued along the same path really avoided financial disaster and started positive job growth.

Let us hope that all political parties will set aside their hard-line positions and work for the good of the American people.

Steven B. Masters, Knoxville

Government can't run health care

With all of the turmoil in our nation's capital over the national debt and raising the "debt ceiling," the question that should be in the back of everyone's mind is, does the federal government have any right to believe it can run a national health care program when it cannot make a decision to raise the limit on our national credit card?

We obviously have a debt crisis. Even our treasury secretary and our president have all but said we are headed for financial Armageddon if a deal is not reached on the debt crisis and federal deficit spending is not reined in. With the new health care law, a 2,500-plus-page bill that, I am certain, nobody read before voting on it, we have added even more of a financial burden to the already overwhelmed and overspent federal government coffers.

Initially we were told the health care act was budget neutral and would even save money. After the health care act became law and we were able to see what was really in the bill, the Congressional Budget Office decided it was not as budget neutral as initially assessed. And if anyone believes the federal government can run any business profitably and spend our money wisely, just look at our struggling Post Office, Amtrak or the Social Security system's "strongbox" in which our retirement funds were to be kept separate from the other money in the U.S. Treasury.

Now our president has openly said that he may decide to use that money in a different way, such as paying our creditors, the Chinese, Japanese and Saudi governments.

So, as our confidence in the federal government continues to wane and we honestly look at the spending habits of our congressional leaders, can we realistically believe they can run our health care system?

Mary Nitkowski, Loudon

Congress members playing stupid

I know our U.S. senators and representatives are brighter than they are letting on.

They have shown in the past that they understand how the debt ceiling vote works. What are they thinking? Are our Congress members so politically parochial that they have lost sight that they are public servants, not servants to their political party, big business and lobbyists?

The country (and the world) does not have the financial stability to be playing this game of chicken. It's high time we, the people that are soon to be affected, tell them to grow up and start serving our interests.

The first debt ceiling was set in 1917. Since 1962 the debt ceiling has been raised 74 times " 10 since 2001. I think our senators have been part of those last 10 raises " Sen. Lamar Alexander since 2003 and Sen. Bob Corker since 2007. The hate and contempt that is being shown for the president is something I never thought I would live to watch. To give just one example of the contempt, let's take a look at the voting record of GOP senators. From 2002 to 2010 Republicans voted "yea" to raise the debt ceiling.

If my Social Security check does not arrive on time, if my husband's pension from the military does not arrive on time, if the Veterans Affairs centers stop seeing my husband for his next appointment, if the much-needed highway work is stopped, if Medicare stops being accepted by my doctor, I am going to be one very angry constituent! I just cannot understand why there aren't more people who are angry and telling Washington to grow up and compromise and table their animosity to the first black president. Get over it and govern.

Marie Clowers, Knoxville

Book title's foulness devalues children

I am not sure that I can find the right words to express the shock, anger and disbelief I experienced while reading Ina Hughs' July 24 column.

I suppose I am one of the few people who had not heard about the book Hughs was endorsing. I am an avid reader, but this had not been on my radar at all.

I am the mother of two daughters, grandmother of two children, not a saint at all but proud to be a Christian. I am short-tempered but on the other side have a very good sense of humor. I have put my children to bed many nights when they were not ready to go to bed. But I have never had an experience that would make (the title of the book) even go through my mind. My children and grandchildren are so very precious to me and my husband. We are so thankful for them. I cannot imagine using such obscene language in reference to my children or their sleeping habits or anything else.

The devaluing of children is why we have mothers who fail to report their missing children or who drive them into a lake to drown them like a sackful of kittens. May God help us and continue to have mercy on us, for we do not deserve it.