Letters to the Editor: Readers have a lot to say about the overturn of Roe v. Wade
Women’s rights
The Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, has realized the women are really nothing more than large children; they are not capable of making decisions that affect their health, welfare and future. It was certainly a mistake to think they should be allowed to vote. Now that was a constitutional amendment, so it’s going to be a little harder to reverse, but with legal geniuses like Guiliani and Eastman and right wing politicians, it can be undone. Trump knows where women belong — as objects to satisfy a man’s ego and/or sexual impulses. Worst of all, women have been allowed to decide not to reproduce at all or to only reproduce when they chose… that needs to go (Griswold v Ct). And people of the same sex marrying? How in the world did we allow that? Of course interracial marriage is okay since Clarence Thomas has done it. Anyone want to start manufacturing burkas for American women?
Step right up, the future is yours.
Sally Wasielewski, Lexington
Dysfunctional logic
It’s amazing how one party fights so diligently to protect the lives of the unborn. But when it comes to those children after they are born, it’ like “You had them, you take care of them.” Simply saying you shouldn’t have had them if you can’t take care of them is, no doubt, dysfunctional logic.
Bob Sutton, Springfield
Court balance
Right now, the right to abortion care is at risk because of a deliberate, decades-long takeover of the Supreme Court by powerful right-wing extremists. We’re seeing the culmination of this takeover as the Court just overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark ruling that made abortion access a constitutional right. This opens the door for states to outlaw abortion and take us back to a time when women were forced to go through with an unwanted pregnancy, potentially endangering their health and hurting their ability to provide for their families.
But it’s possible to undo this damage. The Judiciary Act would add four seats, restoring balance to the Supreme Court. It’s the solution that recent polling showed is supported by the majority of Americans, and it’s what we need to move away from partisan rulings that dismantle our rights and freedoms. And it’s been done before. In fact, Congress has changed the size of the Supreme Court seven times already in our nation’s history. It’s time to do it again.
I’m urging Congress to pass the Judiciary Act of 2021 to ensure we protect our fundamental freedoms and restore balance to our courts now.
Laura Goad, Lexington
Non-voter consequences
For every action there is a reaction. When Trump announced that he was running for president years ago most of us thought he had a snowball’s chance in hell. Hillary Clinton wasn’t a likable enough person for many people to vote for, so they chose not to vote at all. When we saw the voter returns the next morning all hell broke loose after it was announced that Trump had won the election. I remember it vividly. Thousands of people were upset, crying, and sick to their stomachs. How could Trump have won? Trump became president because many Democrats didn’t vote at all because they couldn’t stand Hillary Clinton. Trump got lucky because of a low voter turnout and thousands of first time voters.
Angry women nationwide gathered together in record numbers and marched our city streets in protest, but by then it was too late! By not voting for Clinton in 2016, they allowed a pro-life presidential candidate, who eventually stacked the Supreme Court with pro-life judges, to overturn Roe v. Wade. I was angry with those women who didn’t vote and let Trump win, but I am glad they are paying a price for not voting for Hillary Clinton.
Yolanda M Averette, Lexington
This story was originally published June 28, 2022 at 9:02 AM.