Views in brief
Forced to quit after an abortion
I WAS working my butt off for minimum wage at a Circle K when I found out that I was pregnant. Well, I had to choose between paying my bills and working, or be put on bed rest with a high-risk pregnancy. I chose to work and to end the pregnancy.
I made the mistake of confiding in my boss, who is coincidentally taking fertility treatments and trying to get pregnant. I had the weekend off, and since I was only five weeks along, I could take the abortion pill, and quickly and easily have the procedure done on my days off.
I stopped into my work on my day off, and my boss mentioned that I needed to take a "fit for duty" form to a doctor to be filled out. I have no medical insurance, and I had already obtained my pills from Planned Parenthood. She knew I was terminating the pregnancy. Why did I need a medical form on my days off?
I had the form filled out at the office of Planned Parenthood, took the pills and everything went fine. Then, Monday came. An hour before my shift, my manager calls me and tells me she can't allow me to work until I get further medical papers filled out.
I feel it's none of their business. I was forced to quit. Do I have any rights here? Is it their right to know about my abortion?
Anonymous, from the Internet
"Guarding" New Orleans
AFTER TWO gut-wrenching days spent watching the industrial canal overtop blocks from my house, I was finally able to return home after evacuating New Orleans following Hurricane Gustav.
Upon entering the city, the damage was evident. Tree limbs and leaves were everywhere, the power was still out in most of the city, and the large majority of the population had yet to return.
The most striking thing about the city was the fact that the city was still under the occupation of the National Guard and New Orleans Police Department (NOPD). Days before Gustav made landfall, Gov. Bobby Jindal ordered hundreds of National Guard troops to supplement those already in New Orleans as part of the post-Katrina occupation.
The city was put under a mandatory evacuation and curfew. Useless Mayor Ray Nagin threatened that all those caught breaking curfew or looting would be sent to Angola State Prison in north Louisiana. Angola is one of the most dangerous prisons in the entire country.
To further his point that his number one concern is the private property of New Orleans, Mayor Nagin declared that no help would be available to those that stayed behind to weather the storm. And to make sure that no one was left with any question about if he was sane, he called Gustav "the mother of all storms," and declared that the west bank of New Orleans and Jefferson Parish would flood.
As of September 6, the city was still under curfew. In some neighborhoods, like Uptown and the French Quarter, the curfew was not strictly enforced, but in other neighborhoods, like the Ninth Ward, the curfew was 10 p.m., and the military police and NOPD were patrolling the neighborhood all day.
Gustav was being used as an excuse for the continued military occupation of New Orleans.
Gimena Gordillo, New Orleans
Obama is a chance for change
REGARDING "TWO worlds in one city": While Gary Lapon's article was a stark chronicling of the symptoms of American capitalism, I think Lapon misses an important point: Obama's campaign will never be financed without the contributions of the elite and the rich.
If Obama ever wants to implement his ideals of social change and economic opportunity and equality, he first has to win.
However, there is a much more positive point in this story. Obama is the first campaign in years to raise the significant portion of it donations from donors giving under $200. Obama's campaign is the first in years to be significantly funded by ordinary working people. Obama refuses lobbyist money, and has received his contribution from grassroots supporters, the working and the less-than-privileged.
There is a very positive story that is being missed here, and if the potential isn't reported, we may in our blind pessimism glance over a prime opportunity for the betterment of the working class.
Joseph McCartney, Ohio
What they mean by "change"
BOTH OF the presidential candidates of the "two major parties" say that they will bring "change."
Really? The Republican Party has helped rule this country for over 100 years. The Democratic Party has helped rule our country for over 200 years. But now, they are ready for change.
No matter which candidate is chosen by the Electoral College, the government will still grow bigger every year. The government debt will continue to grow. Pork barrel spending will continue. Congress will still receive automatic pay raises, and we will still have a foreign policy full of double standards. Lobbyists will still subsidize the two-parties, and help write legislation.
The two-party system isn't about change. Democrats and Republicans are the status quo. If John McCain and Barack Obama really believed in change, then they would ask the government to put '' none of the above '' and write-in lines on all presidential ballots. If they really believed in change, then they would invite the other presidential candidates (Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, Bob Barr, etc.) to participate in the presidential debates.
There is one thing that won't change. The next man who becomes president will be a millionaire.
Chuck Mann, Greensboro, N.C.
Facts about the EPA and atrazine
REGARDING "WATER and the thirst for profit": Saying that "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) doesn't regulate 51 different chemicals, including the herbicide atrazine" is an uninformed statement.
The Office of Pesticide Products in the EPA is charged with regulating pesticides. It is what they do, and atrazine is one of the most-regulated pesticides that is approved for use in the United States. The EPA has a Web site devoted solely to the regulation of atrazine.
If anyone thinks that the EPA does not regulate the use of atrazine, a quick perusal of this Web site should demonstrate the lengths that EPA is going to in order to insure safe use of this pesticide. The EPA has instituted a number of monitoring programs in community water systems and ecological watersheds. The EPA continues to evaluate scientific data regarding atrazine and any possible links to cancer and/or endocrine disruption.
I do not advocate the indiscriminate use of pesticides at the expense of our environment and human health, but I do object to the unbalanced view presented to those who may lack the background to interpret sound scientific data.
Becky, from the Internet
