Letters to the editor May 23

Consequences of overturning Roe vs Wade

Anti-abortion Republicans want to overturn Roe vs Wade and end abortions throughout the U.S. The courts may give them what they want, but the U.S. will not be abortion-free.

It’s easy to buy illegal drugs from dealers in almost every community in the U.S. If abortions are illegal, dealers peddling drugs like meth and opiates will sell abortion pills.

Picture a teen being wined and dined by an older man. She’s in love and wants to please him. Then he disappears after she tells him she’s pregnant. Desperate, she approaches a local drug dealer. He tells her she doesn’t have enough money. But he turns on the charm. He’ll give her the pills and the instructions on how to take them if she’ll meet him at his apartment. He just scored a new customer.

She ends the pregnancy. After a while she feels sad and lonely. Now the drug dealer offers her something that makes her feel much better.

Overturn Roe and pregnant teens won’t see medical professionals. But drug dealers will deal with them. The courts may just create a society far worse then what we have now.

—Carole Mackin, Helena

Law of the land

The Democrat controlled New York state government passed a law that allows abortion up until the time of birth. The celebration was so “great” that World Trade Center One was lit up in pink to celebrate women’s rights. I wonder what happened to the rights of the 30 million girls that have been aborted since Roe vs. Wade became the “law of the land”?

Can we all (Democrats, Republicans, independents, socialists, liberals, conservatives, believers, non-believers, etc.) reflect a bit. Have any of these lawmakers ever witnessed, seen a video or read the process by which you kill a human being up to one day before birth? I would venture to say that anyone of them who believe in God and their own judgment after death has not had the guts to do so. How, in good conscience, could they still vote “yes” after watching a baby born just enough to expose the crown of the head so a person could then cut open a hole in the skull in order to insert a vacuum device, suck the brains out, and then methodically cut off the head, arms and legs?

Starting around 1620 until after the Civil War, slavery was the blight of the United States. It started when Africans sold their own persecuted brethren to the English on the coast of Africa. Democrat politicians supported slavery, too, and argued it was their right to own them and in some arguments because they weren’t human. They argued that slavery was the “law of the land.”

This “law of the land” eventually caused the Civil War and 450,000 people were killed, but that was nothing compared to the 60 million babies that have been murdered since Roe vs. Wade. In itself, being “the law of the land” doesn’t make the practice morally right.

—Vinny Morino, Whitefish

The insanity is heating up

As the uberleftist Democrat presidential candidates attempt to flaunt their “woke” so they can garner the nomination, the insanity is heating up.

This was demonstrated best by socialist Bernie Sanders in a recent townhall meeting. Bernie confirmed what he and Kamala Harris (Kamala who?) have espoused — voting privileges for current felons. Even those serving time for the most heinous crimes. He stated that all current felons deserve the right to vote. Multiple murders or rapes, you bet! Bolshevik Bernie had the audacity to say that even the Boston Marathon bomber has the right to vote while waiting on death row. Are Democrats that uncaring or of such short memory to have forgotten the horror of that scene with dead children?

Allow me to make two further points for those liberals who believe that terrorists who murdered children deserve to vote.

First, consider a small town of 5,000 population with a prison that houses 3,000 inmates. How would you like your elected officials, perhaps even your local law enforcement official, to be decided by prison inmates?

Second, if a few million convicted felons in prison (there are just under 4 million in the United States) could vote, how could they sway the views of those stalwart people who run for political office. I shudder to even consider what pandering might result. Instead of gun control laws, would we be seeing Democrats pushing to allow former felons granted the right to own a gun?

Can conservatives and liberals at least agree that felons should lose their right to vote while in prison (except apparently in Maine and Vermont where that right is maintained). It is, after all, a right just like the freedom they lose in prison for committing a crime.

—David Myerowitz, Columbia Falls