Well surprise, surprise in the mail today. I got an invitation from the Tennessean to attend their annual three star banquet on May 8th. This is a banquet that everyone who has a three star letter (first letter published on a particular day) gets to attend. Then you each have the opportunity to stand up and say a one minute something from the microphone. Well last year I had a three star letter but no invitation to the banquet. Here is the one from this year that warranted an actual invitation...
Letters to the Editor: Don't misrepresent bill as a ban on abortion
March 26, 2009
·
To the Editor:
I am not surprised that The Tennessean would choose their highest readership day to lead with a three-star letter about abortion, just when Senate Joint Resolution 127 is slated to be debated on the Senate floor in two days.
The Tennessean has always acknowledged where they stand on the issue of abortion. However, this letter from a mother whose child died after three months of life with deformities not diagnosed has nothing to do with SJR 127, even though her reference to 2000 infers that it does. Banning abortion is not on the table. What is on the table is who gets to put regulations around abortion: non-elected activist judges or elected legislators answerable to the people?
Do informed consent, a 48-hour reflection period and mandating that late-term abortions be done in hospitals sound like abortion is being banned? Why does the abortion industry fight to withhold from the people of Tennessee the right to vote on this issue? We voted on the lottery and on the definition of marriage, but anything that slows down the abortion industry is off-limits?
Letters to the Editor: Don't misrepresent bill as a ban on abortion
March 26, 2009
·
To the Editor:
I am not surprised that The Tennessean would choose their highest readership day to lead with a three-star letter about abortion, just when Senate Joint Resolution 127 is slated to be debated on the Senate floor in two days.
The Tennessean has always acknowledged where they stand on the issue of abortion. However, this letter from a mother whose child died after three months of life with deformities not diagnosed has nothing to do with SJR 127, even though her reference to 2000 infers that it does. Banning abortion is not on the table. What is on the table is who gets to put regulations around abortion: non-elected activist judges or elected legislators answerable to the people?
Do informed consent, a 48-hour reflection period and mandating that late-term abortions be done in hospitals sound like abortion is being banned? Why does the abortion industry fight to withhold from the people of Tennessee the right to vote on this issue? We voted on the lottery and on the definition of marriage, but anything that slows down the abortion industry is off-limits?
No comments:
Post a Comment