LETTERS

Making a Clean Breast of It
Regarding Patricia Calhoun's "The Body Politic," in the December 6 issue:
It is typical for Ms. Calhoun to complain when another company is responsible enough to police itself for obscenities while ignoring the smut in her own paper. If only Westword were content to simply print the word "breast." Instead, it seems compelled to show them (and worse) at every opportunity.

Helen Hahn
Denver

I've been an AOL subscriber for about three months now and have noticed that occasionally I have been unable to access certain areas of what I'll call an "adult" nature. If there is one thing I can't stand, it's having someone else tell me what I can and cannot see, read, say or hear. This e-mail is the second-to-last thing I'll do with AOL. The last will be another e-mail to AOL telling them why I'm canceling my service.

Thanks for Patricia Calhoun's informative article about this communistic company.

I just don't understand why some people feel the need to control everyone else. It is very easy to avoid the things that you are not interested in: Just don't go there. If you find something to be offensive, then don't look at it, or read it, or whatever. I am personally offended by the religious people and the things they believe, and I know I'm not alone, but those of us who don't believe are not out there trying to force others to do what we want.

Maybe we should all get together and start working to ban the public display of a cross. After all, it is an incredibly cruel instrument of torture--therefore, aren't those religions that use it promoting violence and cruelty? I know that there will be some right-wing conservative person out there who is offended by what I have to say and will spout something from the Bible to "prove" how wrong I am. But I'll just find some other passage that supports my position.

As for L. Brouhard's letter in the same issue, it is typical right-wing conservative religious crap. Where are the facts to back up the claim about abortion being the number-one legal money-making business in America today? I don't see any multibillionaire abortion doctors anywhere. Where is all that money going? The rest of the letter doesn't deserve any response.

Ricky L. Berry
Via e-mail

Anti-Social Services Behavior
Thank you for Michelle Johnston's December 6 story, "Who's the Boss?" Those who consider the Parental Rights Amendment to be "innocuous" are carrying the mistaken impression that parents naturally will do what is right for their children. What is overlooked, yet obvious to those of us who constantly witness children's suffering, is that there are many very brutal, neglectful and rotten parents. Last year 2,000 children died from abuse and neglect. Almost half of them had prior or current contact with Social Services, yet they were sent home or left home to die because parental rights are so strong now that child-welfare systems are reluctant to truly protect children. Child abuse is the leading cause of death for children under four.

Parents who are upset with the general philosophy of society's rules and laws might try looking within themselves to figure out why this is so. Children, unlike television sets, chairs and cars, are not anyone's property. Our society partially recognizes children as human beings by deciding what type of care and education are minimal to optimize children's futures. In the earliest years of our country, women, children and slaves were legal property of men. We have liberated women and slaves, but children wait to receive the human rights adults enjoy. These rights would include freedom from assault and the freedom to be protected from further assault, rather than sent back to the perpetrator as if the child were property.

If we are to create a better world, we must decrease the neglect of children's rights, which has perpetuated the manufacturing of criminal adolescents. The creation of these adolescents is the result of chronic abuse or neglect, by both parents and systems. Confidentiality hides this pattern from the public. The amendment needed, desperately, is one that elevates children's rights.

Adoree Blair
Littleton

For an example of why Colorado needs a Parental Rights Amendment, I suggest that readers look at Patricia Calhoun's November 29 column, "The Bottom Drops Out." Parents need some recourse to the power of Social Services.

Natalie Harris
Denver

Once again, the public is indebted to Patricia Calhoun for her courage in revealing Colorado's stormtrooper terrorists: Social Services. It is time taxpayers learned that the worst child abuser in Colorado is the child protection services system, together with certain members of the judiciary.

It is time to end the coverup of incompetency and cruelty that harms children, destroys people falsely accused of abuse, costs taxpayers a fortune in court costs, harms families emotionally and financially, and has resulted in suicides of innocent persons.

Please ask your readers to request that legislators adopt changes in the law to remove immunity from social workers who are negligent, who fail to investigate cases, who are malicious or who coerce family members to perjure themselves by agreeing children are truthful when a child may be stating a falsehood or fantasy. Let's get rid of the multimillion-dollar child-abuse industry created by incompetent child protectors.

1
 
2
 
All
 
Next Page »
 
My Voice Nation Help
0 comments
 
Denver Concert Tickets
Loading...