Letters to the Editor 3/31/11
Constitution, real leaders and home birth
The column by James Krohe Jr. in Illinois Times Feb 17 was interesting and factual [see “Sacred documents: Why the Constitution is not our political holy book”]. However, taking Justice Scalia out of context was typical of his writing and identifying the tea-partyers as ignorant is as offensive as it is untrue. I am not a tea party member, but I do identify with their defining principles, along with millions of other people.
We want to go back to the Constitution specifically because it does not promote big government and this president seems to think that the will of the people means nothing. Name me one government in all of history that was better than our lack of centralized government for the last 200 years? Our country flourished for 200 years, until now. I believe we are headed down the wrong path of big government and taxes. We are America, not Euro-america.
NO TRUE LEADERS
After reading Mr. Hightower’s piece [see “America’s true crisis,” March 24], I need to add my two cents. Not only do we not have any real leaders, the self servers we have do not appear to be very well versed in their jobs. Between the Dupublicans, Scamocrats and other assorted parties, we have people who seem to be interested in serving themselves rather than the country as a whole.
Any sound bite that riles people up is fair game, yet accomplishes nothing. Our true leaders died out a long time ago and have been replaced by publicity-seeking talking heads with no plans that better our condition.
The budget debates should remain in the confines of the U.S. Capitol until resolved and not played out in the media. These ”gentlemen and women” have failed to spend their time wisely, but find time to issue finger-pointing statements to the media.
HOME BIRTH CONUNDRUM
I read the article “Home birth bill takes a baby step for midwives” [March 10]. I think it is very ironic that the AMA opposes both midwife licensure and the emergency transport measure.
They say they want only “qualified personnel” – hospital-trained certified nurse midwives or doctors – but they oppose licensure. The act of licensure ensures that people have the needed training and experience. Why oppose licensure? How is certification better than licensure? Actually I think the guidelines for certification are lower than those for getting a license.
Also, women have been having babies, on their own, or with just a friend or helper, for hundreds of thousands of years. The act of going to a hospital and having a medical person deliver a baby is a pretty recent development. Why is it necessary for every woman to go to a hospital to have a child? I can see that in some cases this may be necessary, but a woman should have the right to choose where she delivers, without fear of reprisal for her assistant in the birth.
Who stands to gain by this opposition? I think that is the question we should look at. And I already know the answer.