Campaign volunteers are a good source for voter education
One of the easiest ways to learn about your candidates is by hearing what their volunteers have to say when they contact you by phone.
In June, we will be casting our votes in the primary election. This is a privilege and responsibility that most patriots consider sacred.
One of the easiest ways to learn about your candidates is by hearing what their volunteers have to say when they contact you by phone. In giving just minutes of your time, you have an opportunity to have your questions answered and to learn where your candidate stands on the issues that most impact your life.
This knowledge is a valuable tool in making your informed decision.
Sadly, far too many voters are unwilling to spare the time. Volunteers working for their candidates are giving of their time to ensure that our elections move forward with a peaceful transfer of power. Responding to them with indifference, hostility and impertinence may temporarily relieve frustration we are feeling, but it will do little to insure a positive outcome.
SEND LETTERS TO: email@example.com. We want to hear from our readers. To be considered for publication, letters must include your full name, your neighborhood or hometown and a phone number for verification purposes. Letters should be a maximum of approximately 350 words.
Will you give them the courtesy of your attention to arm yourself with information about their candidate’s priorities, or will you be the first to complain when another incompetent has been voted into office? Those few minutes may be the best-spent time of your day.
Isie Barclay, St Charles
Expand the Supreme Court
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that we have to have nine Supreme Court justices. Nor would it require a Constitutional amendment to add more seats. In fact, Congress has expanded the Supreme Court multiple times throughout American history.
Congress should use its constitutional authority to rebalance the Supreme Court, which has been taken over by a super-majority that holds extreme views outside of the mainstream of legal thought and out of step with most Americans. Congress must pass the Judiciary Act of 2021, which would add four seats to the Supreme Court and help stem the right-wing super-majority’s attacks on our fundamental freedoms, including the right to access abortion care.
There’s nothing stopping Congress from adding justices, except political will, of course. I’m urging Congress to pass the Judiciary Act of 2021 and add four seats to the Supreme Court.
Emilia Pascu, Mount Prospect
Hidden motives of anti-abortion movement
In her Mother’s Day column on the “prospect of Roe reversal,” Mary Mitchell stated “Still, I don’t believe even the most diehard “right-to-life” supporters want to see women and girls putting their lives at risk trying to end an expected pregnancy.”
I don’t believe that for a second. To some, a pregnancy, however unwanted, is the result of “sin,” and the sinner should bear the consequences of her action, whether that merely ruins her life (depriving her of opportunities for education or career, etc.) or causes her physical injury or death.
One proof of this is that stringent anti-abortion laws do not permit the termination of a pregnancy even in cases or rape or incest. In that context, it should be remembered that a standard defense in many rape trials is that the victim “wanted” or somehow “invited” the sexual encounter.
It is also worth remembering that some of the staunchest anti-abortionists are also opposed to sex education in schools and opposed to permitting the distribution of contraceptives. The bottom line is to deny women access to education and reproductive medical care, then punish them if they should become pregnant.
I do not mean to trivialize the moral aspects of this contentious debate. But I do not believe the “sanctity of life” is protected by the bombing of Planned Parenthood clinics or the murder of doctors who perform abortions, both of which have happened.
Too many devout “pro-life” supporters smear all “pro-choice” supporters as “pro-abortion,” which is simply not true. Some of us believe that “freedom” does not mean the freedom to impose your values on everyone else.
Mitchell wrote that the difficult matter of abortion was something “we don’t talk about.” It is now time that some of the more unfortunate aspects of the anti-abortion movement are discussed.
Charles Berg, Hyde Park/Kenwood