Why bother with laws that don’t work anyway? Re: “Time to legalize immigration,” June 2, and “Parallel between immigration, abortion,” from readers, June 4
So Steve Chapman thinks we should make illegal aliens legal because they are going to come here anyway. Expressing agreement with him, Tanya Spann Roche carries his reasoning a step further, saying that abortions should be safe and legal because women are going to have them anyway.
Proceeding forward with their logic, I have a proposition: Since people are always going to murder other people, we should make sure everybody has access to the most efficient, and therefore most humane, weapons in existence. Murder should be completely legal, since the laws against it have proven to be ineffective.
In fact, I can’t think of any action that has ever been completely eradicated by the existence of laws, so, according to the logic promulgated by Chapman and Spann Roche, there should be no laws at all.
Donna R. Kepler
=”text-align:>
As population grows, diets must change As global population surges toward 9.1 billion people by 2050, Western diets rich in meat and dairy products will become unsustainable, according to a United Nations Environment Program’s report released earlier this week.
The report was prepared by the International Panel of Sustainable Resource Management, drawing on dozens of smaller studies. It notes that agricultural production accounts for 70 percent of global fresh water use, 38 percent of land use and 19 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.
The panel concludes that, just as fossil fuels will be gradually replaced by renewable, pollution-free energy sources like wind and solar power, meat and dairy products in the world’s diet will need to be replaced by vegetables, fruits and grain. Both shifts are absolutely necessary to reduce production of greenhouse gases and consumption of natural resources and to ensure planetary survival into the foreseeable future.
David Konell
=”text-align:>
Kagan’s record is pro-homosexual, pro-abortion The radical, pro-homosexual views of Solicitor General Elena Kagan could have dire implications for traditional marriage in America should her nomination to the Supreme Court be approved. Kagan supported “LGBT rights” by opposing the presence of military recruiters on Harvard Law School’s campus. She called the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy a “moral outrage of the first order.”
She has contributed financially to the pro-abortion National Partnership for Women and Families, which has deep connections to the nation’s most powerful pro-abortion lobbying groups. Through this association and articles she has written, Kagan has staked out a clear position of active support for unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortion.
Kagan has never served as a judge and militantly believes judges should create the law rather than impartially interpret it. Her proclivity to anti-family social engineering will help bring Christian America to its knees.
Neil Jones
=”text-align:>
