Let women, not politicians, decide health matters
I am writing
this letter to encourage everyone to call, write or email Governor
Granholm to encourage her to veto Senate Bill 395, the so-called “legal
birth definition act.” This week, anti-choice members of the
legislature passed legislation that will prevent women, in consultation
with their families and doctors, from deciding the best and safest
medical treatment.
This bill is unconstitutional because it
contains no exception for cases in which a woman’s health is at risk and
should therefore be struck down. This bill puts the legislature in the
position of making tough medical decisions and would outlaw medically
necessary abortions needed by women who have serious, life-threatening
medical conditions such as kidney failure, diabetes and a risk of
stroke.
The Supreme Court has already ruled, in Stenberg v.
Carhart, that women -- in consultation with their families and doctors
-- not politicians, should make decisions about the best way to protect
the health and life of a woman.
This politically driven,
unconstitutional bill should be struck down. I urge Governor Granholm
to veto this bill, and urge all of you to call our Governor and show
your encouragement for a veto.
Martha Lancaster • Director of Community Services
Planned Parenthood Northern Michigan
It‘s a zoo out there
I am outraged after watching Monday‘s Traverse City Commission
meeting. To approve a $200,000 to upgrade the bear cages at the zoo is
ludicrous. The zoo keepers have already stated they have to sedate the
animals during the noise of Cherry Festival... so what makes anyone
think pounding and rebuilding their cages won‘t about kill the poor
animals? Obviously also is one more strike from commissioner Phill
Orth to mayor Margaret Dodd. His reason to keep the zoo and to put the
money into it is that he and his children have gone there. Well, who
didn‘t go there with their children, Mr. Orth? That is NOT the point
here. The care and concern for animals IS.
The zoo needs to go.
It doesn‘t bring in much money and costs $400,000 a year to run. It is
unconscionable in this day and age to keep such a small zoo for such
wonderful large and small animals.Visitors who come here are outraged
about the conditions. Cheers for the wonderful zoo keepers who make an
unbearable life for the animals at least a loving one.
Dorothy Peterson • via email
Thanks are due for tolerance
I would like to publicly thank WLJN, our local Christian radio
station, and New Hope Church at Acme for not responding or supporting
the proposed marriage protection resolution which was submitted to the
City Commission at the beginning of September. It seems that political
correctness has taken precedent over the Holy Sacrament of Marriage.
With each passing day government and Christian organizations turn away
from the teachings of the Bible, and choose to walk the road of
political correctness.
Many Christian organizations of today seem
to only look at the bottom line, much as any successful business would.
Churches today seem to focus on entertaining their members with
musicians on a stage, rather then focusing on the insight the Bible
brings to everyone who listens. The Bible clearly states that marriage
is only to be between one man and one woman, yet for some reason most
Ministers seem to be able to discount, not only the Bible, but nature‘s
law when it comes to any issue that may offend certain minority groups.
I was told as a child, you need to stand up for what you know is right.
How can a minister or anyone, fulfill the responsibilities of
leadership, if it is so easy to turn away from the things we know are
factual and eternal? This issue will soon be seen on ballots around
this nation, where will you stand when it is time to be counted?
Paul Nepote • TC
Letter to Advice Goddess
Your colum carried in the September 25 issue of the Northern Express
contained a letter from a woman complaining that while her boyfriend did
plenty of nice things for her (really nice socks, which I would
appreciate, btw), he didn‘t give her flowers or candy or other
“romantic“ things.
This guy even scrubs the tub for her before she
takes a bath! I don‘t know any guy anywhere who scrubs the tub at all. I
love my wife and I don‘t scrub the tub. I don‘t clean the bathroom at
all, except to take a swipe at a toothpaste drop-letted mirror (three
kids). Guys literally don‘t see the dirt, and don‘t mind it as much when
they do.
If this woman can‘t see the love in that act, she‘s
either/both shallow and stupid. Guys know flowers and candy are pro
forma, dull stuff, especially when done regularly. My wife gets a big
romantic kick when I donate money to our public radio station. I pick a
day (anniversary, birthday, etc.) and the station mentions throughout
the day that support for that day was provided in honor of that
occasion.
Basically, if a guy scrubs a tub for her, that should be
romance heaven. She could also tell him that she‘d like flowers, candy,
etc., sometimes. She‘d get it, too, but it wouldn‘t mean much to the
guy. He‘d see it as a chore or duty. And she might not get the nice
socks, or scrubbed tub, since he‘d now done his “romantic“ duty.
Greg Keith • via email
(You‘re quite right. Amazing how some people just don‘t get what they
have. She‘d better pick up on it fast, or he‘ll be scrubbing the tub for
some other girl! I like your birthday radio idea. And thanks for
writing, and for reading my column! -Amy Alkon)
The top 10
I have been thinking of an idea for your paper In order to make businesses
more accountable for their practices and make it hurt where it counts most: in
their pocketbook. As this area continues to grow in unsightly ways, I am
constantly making mental notes of businesses that I add to my list to boycott. I
only wish that others would boycott in whole so that the message is very clear.
My list includes businesses such as Kohl‘s (for its failure to provide setbacks
and green spaces), Great Wolf Lodge (for it‘s water wasting), The Cherry Tree
Inn (for its wanting to groom the wetland “beaches“), the Ford dealership
(for its light pollution) not to mention others that have been here a while that
simply
were not held accountable by the spineless township zoning
administrators. It seems that these businesses should, at the very
least, be “outed“ in
full public display so that others might reconsider spending their money at
places that care so little for town.
I was hoping your paper could do a detailed
readers‘ poll such as your “best place to eat,“ etc. It would be a great asset
to our area and perhaps do some awareness raising. It might even make these
businesses consider making some changes, or prevent new ones from building who
clearly are only here to make a buck and couldn‘t care less about the impact
they have on this community for generations to come. I am only one person, and
your paper could certainly make a difference if others were to boycott the top
10 that makes the list.
Susan Heckendorn • via email
(I guess we‘d have to nominate ourselves for wasting the timber
resources of the forest to print this rag if we went down that road, but
thanks for the idea. -- ed.)
Harsh punishment for pot
I‘m writing today to clear up a gross misconception that has been
repeated by the local press. This error is in regard to Judge Gilbert,
and his “punishment“ for the crime of using marijuana.
It has
been reported that Judge Gilbert has not been allowed to preside over
drug and alcohol cases, because of his obvious prejudice. This is a lie.
The only sanction that has been levied against him is that he can‘t
sentence these cases, but he can still exercise his will in these cases.
What I‘m telling you is not hearsay, because it happened to me.
Yes, I am a criminal of the same caliber as Judge Gilbert, I smoke
marijuana. But since I am not a judge who takes delight in frequenting
Rolling Stones concerts, I am not afforded the same freedoms as a stoner
judge. This is not the problem, because I am willing to stand up and
defend my belief that the federal law is unconstitutional, and is only
in place to pacify the oil, pharmaceutical, and paper lobbyists. We are
paying the price every day to keep these minorities in power over us.
So, here we sit. Yes, I am willing to go to jail for something I believe
in, unlike some people. The problem, though, is being punished by Judge
Gilbert before my sentenc~.
At my pre-trial Judge Gilbert added
conditions to my bond that robbed me of my time, my money, and my
freedom. Along with a full urine screen (which I expected), he added
daily breathalyzer tests, and two Alcoholics Anonymous meetings per
week.
Let me remind you that mine was not an alcohol-related
charge, and no alcohol was involved. All this he did simply to exercise
his will and project his own shortcomings onto me and various other
individuals in the courtroom. His problems with drinking and drugging
are not my problems; they are his and his alone. In fact, he said as
much, when he told a fellow criminal that he should “spend time [in
jail] thinking about his relationship with alcohol,“ and then added,
“take it from someone with the same problem.“
What Judge Gilbert
fails to realize is that not everyone is an abuser of multiple
substances, as he is. This is more than a miscarriage of justice. It is
prejudice in its most blatant form. He was acting with unprecedented
bias and an eagerness to seem tougher on individuals who are probably
less guilty than he is. I won‘t get a dismissal, and I won‘t get a
mistrial, I will get to go to jail at the time of my sentencing. My
court-appointed attorney thinks I have no case against the courts, and
since I can‘t afford an attorney who has my best interests in mind, I
have no way to defend myself.
By the way, did you know that the
maximum penalty for “use“ of marijuana is the same as the maximum
penalty for assault, and the penalty for “possession“ of a miniscule
amount of marijuana is one year in jail? Weigh your decisions carefully;
it would be better, legally, for you to beat your wife, rather than buy
a bag of dried flowers. It‘s better to be a judge or a cop and break
the law, than to be a peace-loving citizen and smoke marijuana.
You may think that I jest, but I‘m too disappointed in the law to crack
jokes right now. Do we still have questions about why the jails in this
area are overcrowded? This is the way the legal system works in this
country, it is a business and nothing more, so I hope you all find it as
disgusting as I do.
I‘ll see you in 93 days, unless I‘m also
robbed of my right to serve in jail. They may give me probation for an
ungodly number of months, and soak me for every dollar I have in that
time. They have the power to do whatever they wish. But, a man is worth
more than the sum of his many mistakes, and that is the only thing worth
knowing; the only thing that keeps the joy in my heart. Until they take
that too, have a nice day.
Robert L. Pierce • Traverse City
Judging the judge
Mr. Gilbert, I too am sorry you violated the law. Your transgressions
not only diminished the authority and majesty of the 86th District
Court and the laws of the great state of Michigan. You also brought
great shame to yourself, family, and community.
You were in good
faith presented with the title “Your Honor“ by the voters of the Grand
Traverse region and the power to bring judgments to the lives of all
those who stand before your bench. This profound expression of public
trust was not lightly given and once betrayed is very difficult to
restore.
You‘re now a self-confessed alcoholic and drug user, a
condition you were probably in when you first aspired to become a judge.
Consequently, Mr. Gilbert, I believe you attained your judgeship
fraudulently. Therefore, you should immediately surrender it. If at some
point in the unforeseeable future you believe you are worthy to have
the title “Your Honor“ bestowed upon you by the people -- then at that
time you should come before them with a contrite heart.
If your
redemption is sincerely sought your reward will be deliverance, renewal
and hope. But the forgiveness and acceptance you seek from those whom
you have betrayed may never come. I wish you well Thomas S Gilbert.
Steve Redder • Petoskey


