Direct some wrath at the males
Monday, February 11, 2013
We have been seeing the predictable outcry from anti-women forces in reaction to the outpouring of sympathy for the victims of another mass killing. They never lose an opportunity to point out the millions of abortions that have been performed since Roe v. Wade.
I would like to ask these well-meaning folks some crucial questions: What are you doing about the millions of irresponsible and uncaring males who caused those millions of unwanted pregnancies? Or must the onus be entirely on the female?
It is easy to bemoan after the fact. What are you doing to prevent these tragic occurrences? Are you taking the lead in birth control and sex education? Are you doing everything you can to impress upon males, young and not-so-young, their serious responsibilities when they decide to engage in sexual activity?
I will take Del. Bob Marshall and his anti-women colleagues in the state legislature much more seriously the day they introduce a measure that would force males who cause unwanted pregnancies to be sterilized.
Founders chose their words well
In "Right to bear arms needs update" (Feb. 5 letter), Jack Tebo suggests our Founding Fathers could not envision the weapons of today. He says that when the Second Amendment was ratified we had only single-shot pistols.
Not true. As early as 1780, there were pistols that simply multiplied the number of barrels from one to two, four and even six.
Now let's look at what the Founding Fathers said. The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Nowhere did they say musket or single shot.
Now look at Webster's and define arms, which is the word they used. Arms: provide what is necessary for security or defense.
I think the Founding Fathers were brilliant and innovative.
They knew exactly what they were saying, and that the arms of the day would not be the same arms of the future.
Weather JournalStarting to look a lot like summer