Letters to the Editor
namegoeshere
Published Letters: 70 Editor's Choice: 3
-
Overhaul?
[Read the article: Who are you, Anonymous?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First, I like teho's suggestion about having an "anonymous identifier" attached to a user for a given discussion. This seems like a good solution to what seems to be a real problem here.
Second, have you thought about doing a complete overhaul of your letters format? The sort of (forgive my term) clusterfuckery of the letters section makes the facilitation of specific discussions rather difficult. A single thread could have 200 replies to it - why can't these be grouped, and sub-grouped, by the users themselves, as they reply? It seems that Salon has been using the same model for commenting that most major websites do, but is it really the best one?
-
50 years
[Read the article: Too young to tie your tubes?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Remember that less than fifty years ago, women were often denied birth control from their doctor, if said doctor "determined" that the woman would be using it for "immoral" purposes. If we're talking about keeping the law off women's bodies, we need to be doing it totally, not going halfsies like we have been since the modern medical era.
This is true not just for reproductive issues, but for all medicine - take the power away from the establishment (HMOs, the government, etc.), and let the patient, under the counsel of an impartial physician without an agenda of their own, weigh his or her own risks and benefits from particular treatments. Wouldn't that be a refreshing alternative to paternal pats on the head, or variations on "this is what's good for you - I know, I've got a medical degree"?
-
Mischaracterized?
[Read the article: The other side of international adoption]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Watching several friends embark on international adoption with their hearts open and intentions as good as the day is long, I cringe to think that this might be the reaction they'll face from their children after 20-some years of boogers, birthday parties and homework battles. Na characterizes the intercountry adoption experience for the adoptee and for the biological mother as primarily one of loss. "The loss of culture, language and family is something adoptees will never be able to fully reclaim. For birth mothers and families, there can be no replacement for the loss of a child."
I don't think that the column smacks of ungratefulness on the part of Ms. Na. This characterization is what led me to read the article, actually; I was surprised by the idea that anyone would reject their adoptive parents whole hog like this. In fact, she doesn't even comment on her American upbringing, so much as the policies of the country that facilitated it. How do you know what her adoptive family thinks? Perhaps they're supportive of her choice to return to her country of origin and work on social change there. If my child were as motivated as Ms. Na seems to be, I'd like to think I'd be proud of her accomplishments and dedication, and thankful that she was trying to make a difference for women like the one who gave birth to her, and children like the ones they're having. I don't understand where the cringing comes in.
The piece was very short, and it definitely focused on the loss aspect, but perhaps that the most effective way for Ms. Na to speak out for social change in a place that's industrialized its children rather than trying to provide for them and their vulnerable, young mothers; her American upbringing doesn't even come into play. If the women having these babies are being marginalized by society, pressured to carry a pregnancy to term, and essentially forced to give their babies up because of the lack of support they would be facing... giving up their children for adoption seems like less and less of a choice.
-
Positioning
[Read the article: Newt goes off message]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Gingrich/Bloomberg '08 anyone?
I can see the Unity Party chomping at the bit right now...
-
Please don't link to CNSNews.com ever again. Please.
[Read the article: "Show me your hose"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ladies, I beg of you, check out your sources before posting these things:
Cybercast News Service (CNS) is a subsidiary of the conservative news monitoring group, the Media Research Center (MRC). Originally calling itself the "Conservative News Service," CNS changed its name to Cybercast in 2000.
...
CNS was launched on July 16, 1998, by founder Brent Bozell, as an "alternative news service" to mainstream news sources which reports by MRC claim have a "liberal bias."
Source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cybercast_News_Service
The firefighters' story, as told by the gay media - complete with less spin: http://365gay.com/Newscon07/08/080707sdfire.htm
-
Beg to differ.
[Read the article: Worshiping strict statutes of limitation]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...a $100 million settlement was paid out by the Diocese of Orange, and $660 million by the Diocese of Los Angeles.
Actually, we (via our insurance carriers) are the ones picking up a good chunk of that tab - $227 million to be exact:
"The archdiocese will pay $250 million, insurance carriers will pay a combined $227 million and several religious orders will chip in $60 million. The remaining $123 million will come from litigation with religious orders that chose not to participate in the deal, with the archdiocese guaranteeing resolution of those 80 to 100 cases within five years, Hennigan said. The archdiocese is released from liability in those claims, said Tod Tamberg, church spokesman."
--http://www.salon.com/wire/ap/D8QDUB880.html
-
Ah, the ol' 419 scam
[Read the article: Dear sir, my name is Natacha and I would like to marry you]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Seriously, this internet scam has been going on so long, it was inevitable that some sheep farmer would end up getting kidnapped and held for ransom. Right?
http://www.snopes.com/crime/fraud/nigeria.asp