Online only-Letters

Plan B ban

Gregoire and Rossi at odds

Editor, The Times:

As a woman and a mother of girls, I am writing to say I absolutely agree with Monday's editorial "Lift the Plan B ban" [Times, July 7].

A pharmacist's personal beliefs should not disrupt a woman's ability to acquire birth control or fill valid prescriptions. The question that came to my mind was, how do Gov. Christine Gregoire and her Republican opponent Dino Rossi feel about access to Plan B?

Gregoire focused on health care during her first term. She expanded health-care coverage to 84,000 more children and reduced prescription costs. She also stressed that a pharmacist or employer's personal beliefs should not hamper a woman's ability to acquire Plan B medications.

Rossi takes a right-wing stance on emergency contraception. Rossi thinks that a pharmacist's religious beliefs are legitimate grounds to deny patients Plan B medications. In 2004, Rossi refused to answer questions about emergency contraceptives and he continues to do so in this election. But I think we all know where he stands.

I see a clear difference between the candidates: Gregoire, The Seattle Times editorial board and I agree that pharmacists don't have the right to refuse valid Plan B prescriptions to women because of their personal beliefs.

Rossi and ultraconservatives think that pharmacists should be able to provide moral lessons to their patients via the medications they will or will not dispense.

— Liza White, Seattle

Stop pushing morals

A central fallacy exists in the editorial board's position on Plan B: Pharmacists are not pushing "personal views on others" by not fulfilling a single-purpose prescription that is contrary to the business owner's religious and/or moral views.

It is the editorial board members — and those of the similar mindset — who wish to impose their "personal views on others" by declaring their view of morality, based on bankrupt socialist ideology, as the only true view possible; and as such, that it must be forced, under penalty of loss of livelihood, upon people of good conscience who disagree.

Plan B has no alternative medical uses, unlike contraceptive birth-control pills, for which it might be prescribed. It has one purpose and that purpose is directly contrary to not only the beliefs of Catholics but other groups that believe that the human body should be left to act as designed — whether by nature or by God — without the intervention of modern pharmaceuticals.

It would be just as logical for those pushing for Plan B to be sold at every pharmacy to encourage the Legislature to pass a bill requiring firearms to be sold at every store in the state. At least there's a defined constitutional right for that. To do otherwise is obvious hypocrisy.

Therefore, Plan B supporters should start encouraging doctors to stock their own supply of Plan B if they feel that such a medication is necessary to prescribe to their patients.

— Jacob Shepherd, Marysville

Bush and the Olympics

China has upper hand

President Bush said he is going to the opening of the Olympic Games in Beijing because we shouldn't mix politics and sports ["Bush explains why he'll attend start of Olympics," Times, News, July 7]. That's not even close to true.

Bush is going to China because he is being blackmailed to go. His policies have made us the greatest debtor nation in history. We owe enormous sums of money to other countries to pay for his wars, and we owe China more than any other.

China officials can now tell us what to do, and they have told Bush to show up. This is one of the consequences to the many decisions the president and his administration have made. The Chinese are now in a position to decide for him and for us. Considering the decisions he has made, that might be an improvement.

— Doug Selwyn, Seattle

Fourth fireworks

Lake Union show unpatriotic

After witnessing the July Fourth fireworks display at Lake Union, it is evident that Seattle and its fireworks sponsors had no real interest in honoring our country on a day that is meant to celebrate the history and traditions of the United States.

Independence Day is perceived as the birthday of our great nation. If it weren't for an occasional sighting of the American flag waving in the breeze, I would have thought I was at a New Year's Eve celebration rife with several genres of music that were anything but patriotic. Out of an entire 21-minute display, and not until the final 12th song, did they finally show due respect to our nation by playing "Stars and Stripes Forever."

Throwing in the last song felt like a token gesture. As a proud American and resident of this state, I found the fireworks display to be a slap in the face and an embarrassment. Maybe next year Seattle could model their fireworks display after New York City, a city that takes pride in its patriotism and in showing respect for our country.

— Denise Carideo-Harrington, Poulsbo

Sonics deal

Nickels and Gorton failed

Jim Brunner got it right when he labeled Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton big losers ["Winners and Losers," Times, News, July 6].

As a team, Nickels and Gorton proved that both Republicans and Democrats are capable of reaching across the aisle and snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, when they lost what should have been an airtight legal case to enforce a lease that had no exit clause.

Nickels' unprepared and aloof cross-examination performance cost the city credibility. Gorton finished off the city's chances by violating a confidentiality agreement and blabbing about a secret meeting he had with NBA officials. Throughout the weeks leading up to the case, Gorton was on talk radio repeatedly laying the blame for the Sonics' departure at the feet of Gov. Christine Gregoire and the Democratic state Legislature.

Gorton is a smart man and knows politics. Isn't it possible that Gorton violated the confidentiality agreement so his friend Dino Rossi and their Republican allies could make political hay out of the Sonics' departure this November?

— Shawn T. Lee, Shoreline

Shame on the sports columnists

I have enjoyed many of Jerry Brewer's and Steve Kelley's articles over the years, but those guys ought to be ashamed of themselves for not making one single reference to the Seattle Storm in their latest Sonics-themed whinefests.

The whole point of Brewer's article ["Know when it's time to give up hope on Sonics," Times, Sports, July 6] was: Now that we've finally given up hope on the Sonics, who should we "focus our energy on"? He then goes on to list the Seahawks, Huskies and Mariners as all he has to hope for.

Kelley's sobfest ["Whom to root for now," Times, Sports, July 6] suggests driving all the way to Portland for our basketball fix. Four inches to the left of his photo is a story about another blowout at KeyArena (much closer than Portland) by the only home team to bring us a trophy in my lifetime.

Yes, I understand Brewer and Kelley are writing about the NBA, and I am deigning to mention the WNBA in the same sentence. My point is, would it have killed them to mention the amazing team we still have, draining buckets left and right, at the arena that wasn't good enough for the Sonics? The Storm has the strongest roster yet, is locally owned, and is quite possibly on the way to another championship year, but the attendance sure doesn't reflect it. C'mon Seattle, show the love! Steve and Jerry, you're not helping!

— Matt Slinger, Seattle

KeyArena's fate

Build another one

The KeyArena remodel was a bad idea that cost us the Thunderbirds and the Sonics ["Turn out the lights," Times, Sports, July 3]. It's shortcomings drove both teams away. It was, and still is, being used for political reasons to boost Seattle Center revenue.

Now, even without both tenants, the city wants to cripple any future tenants in this broken relationship. We need to get behind the former Sonic Fred Brown and the B2 arena plan and build a world-class arena that works for the both the NBA and NHL and gets teams out of the political games that cost us the teams.

Has anyone noticed we cannot get national conventions or large sporting events due to an inadequate arena? Let us move on from KeyArena and become world class. Unfortunately, I still feel we are going to have another KeyArena remodel pushed through quickly without seeing the state's long-term needs addressed.

Let's stop looking at an arena as a means to subsidize Seattle Center and look at it as an asset that should be free of political baggage. An arena can be built with private money, and it should be because politics poisons the situation and leads to failure.

— David Alan Winspear, Seattle

Veteran votes

We want McCain

I retired from 24 years of military service, and I maintain close ties to my old profession. Therefore, I feel my experience and knowledge qualifies me to take strong exception with Christopher Parker's editorial ["Veterans could be the swing vote," Times, guest commentary, July 7].

I strongly believe military voters will support Republican presidential candidate John McCain — not only have they always leaned toward the GOP to the tune of about 75 percent, they also know that military retirees have honest backbones and, thereby, tend to vote for them. The only exception to this is when they shun retired military officers who have climbed the ladder using politics as the rungs — these we universally despise.

To support my claim, ABC News selectively sorted through 60 GIs to find six who proclaim they'll not vote for McCain this November, and then reported this as "news." Using these statistics we see that, contrary to Parker's claim, 90 percent of veterans say they will vote for McCain. If true, Parker is flat wrong.

Parker bolsters his argument by claiming 10 years of military service. This claim raises a flag to military retirees because — aside from those who're medically retired at 10 years — this length of service often reflects someone who has been "asked to leave" the military. In short, it undermines, rather than boosts, his authenticity.

— Gerald J. Stiles, retired U.S. Air Force major, Sequim

Aid for Africa

U.S. needs to keep pledges

Monday's report "G-8 summit opens with spotlight on aid for Africa" [Times, News, July 7] highlights the need for the United States to live up to its commitments to the world's poor and hungry.

Both the U.N. secretary-general and the World Bank president insisted that rich nations strengthen their efforts to meet poverty-reduction and other development goals. President Bush emphasized the urgency of providing aid for Africa.

But so far the G-8 has delivered just $3 billion of the $25 billion in additional aid it pledged to Africa in 2005. While the United States is following through on its 2005 commitments, we are falling behind the pledges we made in 2000 to hungry and poor people throughout the world.

We need to do two things. First, the United States needs to increase funding that directly addresses the root causes of hunger and poverty to meet our commitments from 2000.

Second, we need to ensure that this money is spent effectively by rationalizing foreign assistance. Our global development policies are implemented in 12 departments, 25 agencies and almost 60 government offices — hardly a model of seamless efficiency!

— Pierre de Vries, Kirkland