Letters: Don't believe health care lobbyists who are fostering fear
Nov 6, 2009
Don't believe health care lobbyists who are fostering fear
Dear Editor,
I am so tired of building vacation homes for pharmaceutical CAOs. I am so tired of funding bonuses, cars, and apartments for health lobbyists. I am so tired of sacrificing my children's education to finance Caribbean conferences and Las Vegas junkets for insurance companies.
The issue is not health care but how to keep the rich even richer at the expense of you and I. So how much are you willing to give or, rather, willing to have taken from you?
While health reform and a public health option just make plain sense from every perspective, we are being driven by fear like a cattle stampede to leap to our preverbal financial death so that others can benefit from our demise. Higher premiums, exclusionary clauses, service exceptions and limitations drive 70 percent of all personal bankruptcies. While the evidence is irrefutable, we are willing to believe purchased media, paid campaigns and even paid legislators to turn our head away from programs that will literally save lives.
Today, we have a Republican congresswoman who said, "Americans have more to fear from the Democrats' health care bill than we do from any terrorist right now in any country." The outrageous statement is made without any specifics or details of what she opposed. Over and over we hear unsupportive fear from her and others with outright distortion from the extreme right of the Republican Party to protect insurance companies, pharmaceuticals and the health care industrial complex, whose size now dwarfs the military complex of the '50s and '60.
It is a shame that so many of us will get wrapped up in the rhetoric only to lose possibly the greatest single service that any free and industrialized nation can provide: secure, affordable, and life-giving health care for all. What a shame.
Mark Grzan, Morgan Hill
Columnist practicing non-religious beliefs should be omitted from paper
Dear Editor,
I am appalled at the Lisa Pampuch column in the Times and that the Times printed it. What is the purpose of this column? If she wants to practice non-religious beliefs and follow the dictates of a foul mouth like Bill Maher instead of a Rick Warren or a Joel Osteen that is up to her. But to promote her lack of belief in any type of what she calls supernatural and I call religion should be left out. And, blaming the Pope for the AIDS epidemic is just plain wrong.
It is a tragedy when the welfare of children is placed in jeopardy because parents place their religion ahead of their children. She states that this happened 50 times in a 27-year period and as sad as this is, not a large number. This year, 88 people, including children, have been murdered in their place of worship in America. What does this statistic tell Pampuch?
The first amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." This has been up for interpretation for years. Some see it as the government cannot dictate or infringe on religious practices in any way. Others see it as religion cannot cross over into the government. This debate never ends.
In Warren, Mich., a group is attempting to place a nativity scene in a public area. The Freedom from Religion Foundation has sued to block this structure. A public poll on AOL showed 88 percent in favor of the nativity scene. What kind of group would have on their agenda freedom from religion?
So she argued that religion must not be exempt of rational criticism. Whom did she argue with and why? What would be gained by this dialogue? Since I am a taxpayer and the majority want a cross or the Ten Commandments placed in a public place or a prayer at a sport event, I should be able to exercise my rights as a citizen and taxpayer and not worry about upsetting people like Pampuch who have a different agenda.
Why not go along Highway 25 and remove the crosses of the departed killed in accidents? Does that offend her? How about Arlington Cemetery? This is full of crosses and Stars of David; this might upset the Freedom of Religion Foundation and Pampuch.
On the telecast of the World Series during the 7th inning stretch a member of our military sang God Bless America. What is her take on that? Should we ban that as well?
Our President attends church on a regular basis with religion part of his life. What would Pampuch's take on that be? He is friends with Rick Warren, possibly gaining some inspiration from Rick's books such as "A Purpose Driven Life." I know she was upset with the invocation given by Warren during the inauguration.
In closing, I could go on and list the good that faith based charities have done, including those in our local community such as sponsoring and feeding families during the holidays, tending to people less fortunate and sponsoring missions in some of the countries she accused of witchcraft.
I would recommend that the Times take a closer look at what they publish. Pampuch's writing usually attacks someone or some policy she disagrees with under the guise of "critical thinking." Does she think we are too stupid to think for ourselves?
Fred Oliveri, Morgan HIll
POST A COMMENT
If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate.
Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form.
Hope flies again
