Where is Gazette on sex-selective abortion?
Editor:
There is a picture that has stirred the conscience of the world, but it might have escaped your attention. It is a gruesome scene of a bed in a nondescript room. On the bed lies Feng Jianmel. She looks exhausted, physically and emotionally. Sweat mats her dark hair to her face. Blood stains the sheets.
Beside her is another person. Rather, the lifeless body of another person -- Feng's 7-month old baby. The baby was stillborn via a birth that was chemically induced over and against the wishes of the child's mother.
That's right -- Feng was forcibly restrained, she has the bruises to prove it, and government officials then injected her with a chemical that forced her to deliver her baby. Dead.
This merits your attention because you have long been an advocate of human rights. Indeed, you regularly provide readers with commentary that suggests morality is evolving in favor of greater human rights. Your commentary has suggested human rights ought to be afforded to murderous felons expecting the death penalty, to same-sex couples wishing to redefine marriage, and to society through a health-care system that upholds the evolving human right of family planning.
In this, however, it's evident that the very phrase "human rights" is just a boogey man used to cover a multitude of desires and policy positions that don't square with the natural right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Therefore, I wish to remind your readers that Baby Jianmel had a right to life that China's fully evolved family-planning policy denied.
Like most West Virginians, I believe that every innocent human life is worthy of protection. Sadly, however, the abortion industry does not concur. Rather, here in Charleston, the Women's Health Center of West Virginia and Kanawha Surgicenter are legally permitted to accept (and advertise for) clients who wish to abort their child simply because their baby is a female.
China, Feng Jianmel's home country, actively enforces the abortion of baby girls in favor of baby boys. Are these the types of "rights" you would hold out as "evolved" to the readers of West Virginia's newspaper of record?
We eagerly await your commentary, and hope you will join most West Virginians in standing guard over innocent human life.
Jeremiah G. Dys, Esq.,
President and General Counsel,
The Family Policy Council of West Virginia
Charleston
Where is Gazette on sex-selective abortion?
Editor:
There is a picture that has stirred the conscience of the world, but it might have escaped your attention. It is a gruesome scene of a bed in a nondescript room. On the bed lies Feng Jianmel. She looks exhausted, physically and emotionally. Sweat mats her dark hair to her face. Blood stains the sheets.
Beside her is another person. Rather, the lifeless body of another person -- Feng's 7-month old baby. The baby was stillborn via a birth that was chemically induced over and against the wishes of the child's mother.
That's right -- Feng was forcibly restrained, she has the bruises to prove it, and government officials then injected her with a chemical that forced her to deliver her baby. Dead.
This merits your attention because you have long been an advocate of human rights. Indeed, you regularly provide readers with commentary that suggests morality is evolving in favor of greater human rights. Your commentary has suggested human rights ought to be afforded to murderous felons expecting the death penalty, to same-sex couples wishing to redefine marriage, and to society through a health-care system that upholds the evolving human right of family planning.
In this, however, it's evident that the very phrase "human rights" is just a boogey man used to cover a multitude of desires and policy positions that don't square with the natural right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Therefore, I wish to remind your readers that Baby Jianmel had a right to life that China's fully evolved family-planning policy denied.
Like most West Virginians, I believe that every innocent human life is worthy of protection. Sadly, however, the abortion industry does not concur. Rather, here in Charleston, the Women's Health Center of West Virginia and Kanawha Surgicenter are legally permitted to accept (and advertise for) clients who wish to abort their child simply because their baby is a female.
China, Feng Jianmel's home country, actively enforces the abortion of baby girls in favor of baby boys. Are these the types of "rights" you would hold out as "evolved" to the readers of West Virginia's newspaper of record?
We eagerly await your commentary, and hope you will join most West Virginians in standing guard over innocent human life.
Jeremiah G. Dys, Esq.,
President and General Counsel,
The Family Policy Council of West Virginia
Charleston
Charleston needs more bike racks
Editor:
I recently moved to Charleston and was excited to learn about my new home and the community event, FestivALL.
I picked up a brochure for the East End Garden Tour at the Bluegrass Kitchen on Saturday and grabbed my bike for a great afternoon touring the area. I stopped by the downtown library and a post office and I didn't have to worry about where to park my bike.
Capitol Street, the post office and the library were all amazingly bike-rack equipped.
Sunday, I rode my bike to the Civic Center for Taste-of-ALL, but I found no bike rack. I saw one bike chained to a light post, but I figured that might not be legal. I rode my bike around the mall, too, with no luck. I left because I felt awkward about asking where I could legally park nearby.
In 2010, the Sustainable Kanawha Valley Initaitive funded 20 bike racks in South Charleston for roughly $3,000. That's $150 per rack. It would be great if the Civic Center and mall invested in a small (easy-to-find) bicycle-friendly parking area for those who choose alternative modes of transportation but still spend their dollars around Charleston.
Stacy Gloss
Charleston
Hooray to Jay for coal speech
Editor:
Hooray to Senator Rockefeller for his recent speech to Congress on the inevitability of phasing out coal as a chief source of energy.
Unlike Senator Manchin and Congresswoman Capito, he recognizes the value of the EPA's anti-pollution regulations that protect all of us.
And like Senator Byrd, who came late to political wisdom, Senator Rockefeller deserves high praises for acknowledging the economic and scientific realities of energy usage.
Kathryn A. Stone
Charleston
Get Connected