Letters to the editor MUST be accompanied by your daytime and evening phone numbers for verification purposes. Letters without phone numbers cannot be considered for publication. Letters must include first and last names. Short letters have a better chance of being selected for publication. We do not publish anonymous letters.
Broken will equals
reverse discrimination
I can’t believe that two Philly papers are trying to immortalize a woman, Marie Hicks, by calling her "Philly’s Rosa Parks," etc., for participating in what many call the biggest travesty of justice in our history.
Stephen Girard’s will was broken because of the "poor white male orphans only" phrase, and if someone can explain to me how that differs from the United Negro College Fund, I’ll gladly listen.
When Bill Gates can specify "African American and Spanish" in his scholarships, and Oprah and Bill Cosby can give to historically black colleges and build schools in Africa with the money they earned here, it’s absurd that Stephen Girard couldn’t specify how his estate should be handled.
The civil rights movement was supposedly to end discrimination, but now, instead of "whites only" drinking fountains and restrooms, we have the NAACP, black caucus, black clergy and hundreds that start with "black," but nothing that starts with "white," as that would be prejudicial.
Instead of a victory, the breaking of a man’s will to satisfy one segment of our society only alienated a large portion of us, and if that makes us racist, so be it.
When black-only groups are disbanded and a case like Girard’s will is reviewed, we might have a colorblind society, but in Philly that doesn’t seem imminent.
The Philly papers used to publish a lot of my articles, but they won’t now, so I guess you don’t rate ink if you are controversial.
Jim Laverty
Parkwood
Nutter offers real
solutions to our woes
Next Tuesday Philadelphia voters will decide their candidate for the Democratic Party for the mayoral general election. One man stands among the candidates — Michael Nutter. He represents the wind of change in a Democratic Party that has been stagnant for quite a few years in Philadelphia.
Michael Nutter offers clear-cut solutions to the problems facing our city. From ethics to environmentalism, from ending crime to corruption, Michael Nutter has offered the citizens of Philadelphia a vision of what a great place our city can be.
I have heard a lot of talk from the other candidates on how they plan to save the city. Most of the plans lack real structure and will result in very reactionary planning. Crime, while a problem, stems from more than just guns. It stems from problems like poverty, poor education and a lack of jobs. Michael Nutter has offered a concrete plan to address these problems.
Michael has also addressed the environmental issues that plague our city and are part of a much bigger problem, our global environment. Green rooftops, single stream, weekly recycling, trees, pollution-controlled city vehicles, are but a few of the visionary ideas that Michael has for our city.
Some may say, "What’s the big deal with his environmental vision?" My answer is simple: "Have you ever looked at the overall health of many people in the city of Philadelphia, especially the youths living in poorer neighborhoods where pollution rates are higher because of their relationship to heavily trafficked areas?" Asthma rates among children in Philadelphia are staggering.
Michael Nutter represents a man that all can respect. His ethics are second to none and his desire to save the city is genuine.
While others have taken cheap shots at Michael, he has never made it personal. While others claim to want "to take the for sale sign off of City Hall," that same candidate has used his enormous wealth to try and buy Philadelphia’s highest office.
Finally, please do not make this issue about race; we have been traveling down this road for too long.
This city isn’t about being black or white, it’s about people coming together to combat the issues that have caused our city to decline. Come together behind Michael Nutter, a man who sees all Philadelphians as equal.
Next Tuesday when you make your choice for the next mayor, remember what Michael Nutter stands for and the honesty and integrity that he has shown throughout this campaign. Vote for Michael Nutter. I know I will.
Terence M. Gibbs
South Philadelphia, formerly of Tacony
Do your duty at
Max Myers on Saturday
On Saturday, City Year and Samuel S. Fels High School are coming together to beautify Max Myers Recreational Center, on Bustleton Avenue between Hellerman Street and Magee Avenue.
City Year is an AmeriCorps organization that brings young idealists from across the country to perform one year of service, totaling more than 1,700 hours of tutoring, mentoring, after-school programming, physical service projects, and leadership development opportunities.
Our team at Fels sees this as a great opportunity to unite our community and turn this rec center into a better place for students to have fun.
We strongly believe that we all can play a part in strengthening our city.
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "Everyone can be great — because everyone can serve." This is a chance for everyone who believes in the future success of our community to come and put their idealism to work.
On Saturday we will be engaging the neighborhood in numerous types of service that will truly take Max Myers to the level that it strives to be. City Year is known for painting some of the most beautiful murals in Philadelphia.
This day of service will be no different. More than seven murals will be painted by our volunteers throughout the playground. On top of this we will be cleaning and re-coloring the basketball courts and baseball fields. However, that is not all. We will also be restoring the playground, removing graffiti, and eating some amazing food (free lunch provided for all volunteers).
The entire community is invited to join approximately 150 high-school youth and their families. So, come one, come all, and help in making your community gorgeous.
Matt Bertschman
City Year Greater Philadelphia
Babies come out the winners
in Supreme Court’s decision
In reply to the letter from Lauren Lambrugo of Planned Parenthood (Abortion ruling puts pregnant women at risk, April 26 edition) condemning the Supreme Court’s decision that ruled Congress’ 2003 partial-birth abortion ban is constitutional:
What did Congress ban and the Supreme Court uphold? Congress banned a barbaric abortion procedure. The Supreme Court found that a late-second-term baby (after 20 weeks) deserves protection from being delivered feet first except for her head, and having scissors driven into the back of her skull when she is 90 percent delivered.
Find this hard to believe? Abortion doctor Martin Haskell has written an instruction paper explaining how this procedure is performed. Details can be found at www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/Haskellinstructional.pdf
Planned Parenthood makes the unbelievable statement that "Doctors say that these abortion methods are the safest to protect women’s health."
The Physicians’ Ad-Hoc Coalition for Truth (more than 600 doctors, most ob-gyns and fetal/maternal experts), along with former Surgeon General Koop submitted a letter to Congress stating, "There are no medical conditions, either maternal or fetal, that necessitate the use of partial-birth abortion to remove the baby, or to preserve the mother’s health or future fertility."
The American Medical Association supported a ban on partial-birth abortion after a careful study failed to find "any identified circumstance" in which the partial-birth abortion procedure is needed. Even with that being said, the ban has an exception for life of the mother.
Planned Parenthood says that they are rare and done for women’s health. However, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, told the New York Times on Feb. 26, 1997, that the method was used 3,000 to 5,000 times annually, and "in the vast majority of cases" on "a healthy mother with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along."
On Sept. 16, 1996, the Record (Bergen-Hackensack, New Jersey) published a report by staff writer Ruth Padawer, based on separate interviews with two abortion doctors at a single abortion clinic in Englewood, who independently told her that they perform more than 1,500 partial-birth abortions annually in that facility.
"Most are Medicaid patients, black and white, and most are for elective, not medical, reasons: people who didn’t realize, or didn’t care, how far along they were."
Planned Parenthood says the decision is dangerous to women. The timing of the decision is weeks after newscasts around the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amillia_Taylor) announced that a little girl named Amillia Taylor who spent only 21 weeks in the womb, only 9 inches at birth, has gone home from the hospital healthy and thriving.
Since more than 50 percent of those being killed by partial-birth abortion are female and most are at least as old as Amillia when she was born, it seems like the Supreme Court’s decision is actually quite protective of women. This decision will probably save thousands of women like Amillia from a dreadful death.
Planned Parenthood’s letter closed by saying that last year’s victories by the Democrats were about voters voting to protect the right to have partial-birth abortions. There is one element of truth in the letter. All of the Democratic presidential candidates recently voiced their opposition to the Supreme Court decision. Therefore when you pull the Democrat lever, whether you like it or not, you are voting for partial birth abortion. Think of Amillia when voting.
Marianne Lacey
Holmesburg
• • •
Of course a Planned Parenthood representative would be complaining about the Supreme Court ban on partial birth abortion. Lauren Lambrugo wrote that Congress should "stop playing politics." Congress has a responsibility toward the citizens of this country. That is being done little by little, with the littlest of our citizens. Our prayers are working. People like you, who consider a baby’s life worthless, will soon be out of a job. You ought to start sending resumes to organizations that better society. Your present "business" is nothing but a facade. You are not "educating" or helping anyone. You are concerned, however, with putting cash in your pockets from the government. The more pregnancies you terminate, the more money you get.
May respect for the unborn grow from here on. Can I get an "AMEN"?
Barbara Walton
Torresdale
How is God a matter
of life and death?
Regarding Daniel Page’s letter to the editor last week (Why it’s OK to be pro-life and pro-death penalty) concerning hypocrisy when one opposes abortion and yet stands for capital punishment, I began to think about your comments. While I agree with the value of life, our society does have laws that DO protect us from violent offenders.
I find it very interesting that you used God as the entity that instituted the death penalty. If that is the case why did it take so long for many states to ratify these laws? If God did provide these laws, why do people kill? Is this your definition of "divine intervention"?
According to you, God ordains "killing in preservation of human liberty" — you can’t use that as a platform to be pro-choice!
Isn’t it possible that President Bush is a heinous fiend who preys upon the weak? More than 3,000 U.S. soldiers have given their lives for their country. Is this war justifiable?
Now onto your study of the scriptures, I would like to bring a few passages to your attention, beginning with Exodus 35/2: Should one be put to death for working on the Sabbath? Hypocritical? Hmmm, you tell me. How about Leviticus 11/7: Should one be put to death for touching a pig’s skin? I hope you’re not an Eagles fan!
Let’s be fair here — our heritage is not dictated by Judeo/Christian values. As Americans aren’t we supposed to believe in the separation of church and state? You can torture the scriptures in many ways to confess to anything.
Choose your words wisely, Mr. Page, and I hope you can understand that God is different with everyone. You can’t put proper renderings on writings that are objective. That’s the same as what the English did to Catholics in Ireland. Were they justifiable killings?
Kevin M. Coughlin
Fox Chase
Does a handicapped placard
make you less handicapped?
In response to George Morris’ letter in the April 26 edition (No easy way in for handicapped) about people who are not handicapped hanging a tag (actually called a placard) on the inside rear-view mirror: Mr. Morris, how do you know that they are not handicapped? I am 39, have 11 herniated discs in my back and neck, and I have a permanent handicapped parking placard that I hang on my rear-view mirror. I am handicapped due to my work-related injuries, and several of my friends have placards in their cars, also having bad backs and necks due to work-related injuries.
We all have good days and bad days with our injuries and believe me, the bad does outweigh the good.
A placard is issued after a doctor signs the application stating that the person is indeed handicapped and is in need of handicapped parking.
A handicapped person might not be confined to a wheelchair but might have a bad heart or other physical conditions that might classify us as handicapped.
Remember that anyone can be driving someone else’s car with a handicapped placard or a handicapped license plate and choose to take advantage of the special parking.
I have two questions for you: Does a handicapped license plate make someone more handicapped? Are you a doctor that can look at someone and say that they are not handicapped without knowing their medical history?
Please don’t judge everyone with a placard as not being handicapped, because we are just as handicapped as someone with a handicapped license plate. Thank you.
Bob Gardner
Pennypack Woods
Getting rid of Dumbo
was a bad decision
What kind of a zoo has no elephants? The Philadelphia Zoo, that’s who! Our elephants have been with us forever. Now they are packing their trunks and moving. The worst is they are going to a bigger and better habitat that has more room for them to roam. Do they know something we don’t? Who’s next?
The high prices for admission and parking are keeping a lot of families away from the zoo. They can no longer afford to spend that amount of money for a day’s outing. The gorilla families were the biggest draw to the zoo, and tragically they were lost in a 1995 fire, due to someone not caring enough to check on a preventable event. It’s sad, but if the situation gets worse, I think all the animals will pack up and leave.
Ask any kid what animals do they want to see at the zoo? They will say monkeys and elephants.
Shirley Stahl
Lawndale
Zoning panel
would offer protection
Guest Opinion
By Beverly Coleman
Philadelphia is a community of neighborhoods and neighbors. As residents, we are concerned about the increase in crime and homicide. We are all aware of the decaying and vacant buildings that blight our neighborhoods and we want our kids to attend good schools. Dealing with these troubling issues is part of the solution, but there is another less visible way that we as Philadelphians can do something to preserve our neighborhoods.
On May 15, Philadelphia voters will be asked, through Ballot Question #6, to decide whether to create a new Zoning Code Commission that would spend the next year developing a modern zoning code.
The question is simple: Should a new code be created, one that would enact simplified, easy-to-understand, and predictable rules for land use in Philadelphia? Rules that everyone must follow? The answer is YES.
If you are a homeowner, the current zoning code requires a variance and visit to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for any external addition you may want to make on your home. It’s a process that practically dares homeowners to make improvements; just ask anyone who’s ever tried to build a deck, or enclose a porch, or add a room to his or her home. The code is terribly out of date and out of touch with Philadelphia’s neighborhoods.
The Zoning Code Commission would include a diverse group of community, government and business leaders, as well as planning and design professionals who would be appointed within 60 days of the primary. Public meetings and public hearings will be held with preliminary and final reports delivered by the fall of 2007.
Zoning code reform can enhance and improve Philadelphia’s city planning process while encouraging development and protecting the character of Philadelphia’s neighborhoods. This must be a priority for our city. The current zoning code is 50 years old, which is ancient by national standards. To keep our communities strong and healthy, we need to start now on zoning reform.
Major cities like Chicago and Milwaukee have modernized their zoning codes to allow for increased development and neighborhood revitalization and it is time for Philadelphia to catch up to these cities in developing rules that encourage smart growth and neighborhood preservation. We can and we should create a user-friendly zoning code based on good planning principles.
Voters have the opportunity on May 15 to begin this critical discussion by coming out to vote on these and other critical issues. For the sake of our neighborhoods, support zoning reform and vote yes for ballot question #6. ••
Beverly Coleman is executive director of NeighborhoodsNow (formerly the Philadelphia Neighborhood Development Collaborative)
Share your opinion by e-mail
Click here to read this week’s endorsements for City Council at large . . .
Click here to read this week’s endorsements for City Council’s 7th district. . .