From our readersIssue Date: May 16, 2013
Students Speak Out
Abortion: Dead or Alive?
I feel that we need to stop abortion and make it illegal. Did you know that, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), 55 million plus abortions were performed in the years 1973-2011 just in the United States alone? 50% of women who have sought an abortion have had at least one previous abortion. The abortion rate for the United States is among the highest of developed countries. Both are according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute.
Whenever a woman is aborting a baby, she is killing an innocent human being. Life begins the moment of conception, not when a baby is born. According to Doctor Phil, Professor of Pediatrics, Anesthesiology and Neurobiology at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, babies feel pain during an abortion no matter what stage of the pregnancy a woman is at. Why would a woman make her baby suffer? Aborting a baby is like murdering a human being.
Instead of using abortion to get rid of a baby, think of other options. For instance, you could put him or her up for adoption. Over 2 million couples are waiting to adopt! Some women cant have children because they cant conceive, they have health issues, and some women just cant physically have a child. So give these couples a chance to become a parent, like they have always wanted to be! There is no wrong way to have a baby.
Did you know that abortion is more dangerous than childbirth? Abortion can lead to many risks and complications as you become older. For example, according to the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, abortion increases the likelihood that a woman will develop breast cancer. Another risk is damage to internal organs and even death. Would you honestly put your life at risk because you arent ready or dont want a child? Other complications are having emotional problems too. For instance, you could have eating disorders, guilt, depression and suicidal thoughts. So are these risks and complications really worth it? Do yourself a favor, dont get an abortion.
Abortion is 100% preventable. So lets save those 55 million plus babies. They have a right to life. Abortion stops a beating heart, but together we can change this problem. We must ban abortion in the United States.
Animal Testing Must Continue
Testing on animals helps medical researchers find cures for deadly diseases, saving many peoples lives. When most people think of animal testing, they immediately think of household pets, like cats and dogs. Its not like that at all. According to the National Institute of Health (NIH), 9 out of 10 animals used are rats or mice.
My first reason for encouraging the use of animals for medical reasons is that testing on animals helps finds cures for deadly diseases. The National Association of Biomedical Research stated that cancer, strokes, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinsons disease and Alzheimers are just some conditions for which animal experiments have benefitted research. According to Dr. Francis Collins, an NIH director, the use of animals in research has enabled scientists to identify new ways to treat illness, extend life, and improve health and well being.
Secondly, there are not any alternatives that can replace animal testing yet. Some computer simulation has been created, but it is not nearly advanced enough to replace animals. Carl Cohen, a professor at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, says that investigators must learn the impact of a new compound or a new vaccine on the living organism as a whole. He means that the replacement of live animals with tissue samples or computer simulation is not okay. Side effects that can be dangerous can only be figured out on living organisms.
My third and final reason is that animal testing is becoming more humane. According to Erik Stakstand, the managing editor of ScienceNow, many new technologies are being developed that are making animal testing more humane and reliable. Now new sensors and monitors can be implanted in an animal to transmit data. Because these new sensors are less stressful for the animals, the data produced is more accurate and much fewer animals are being injured or killed. Some animals are even able to be released into their natural habitats because of these new sensors.
It is for these reasons that I know animal testing for medical research is needed. Many people are alive because of animal testing, and if animal testing abruptly stopped or was reduced, there would be many more suffering people. Animal testing is necessary and must continue.
Letter to Editor:
In the paper I have followed the lawsuit against the MarOco Landfill by the owners of a local restaurant, golf course and land development. What I have been wondering is which was here first? After all if you locate or buy next to an existing business you should not be surprised when there is a problem at any point because of the decision to locate where you did. If you buy next to a tavern you may have trouble with noise and patrons. If you buy next to a farm you may have smells and animal noises. If you buy near a gravel pit there will be dust and noise when they are blasting or crushing. The examples are endless. So I did a little checking into the time line.
The time line is: March 1981 - the initial site report for the landfill was sent to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), October 1981 - the feasibility report was submitted to them also. The WDNR approved the project in February 1983. July of 1988 is when the landfill started accepting waste. In February 1989 the current owners purchased the golf course named Hi-View along with the unfinished house owned by Mr. Guerrieri. The new owners finished the house a few years after buying the property, and in April 2005 the Town of Stephenson approved the plat for the land development.
So it seems like the current owners should have known there was a huge potential problem from when they first looked at purchasing the property. Maybe they should be suing the former owner or real estate company that handled the sale? The landfill was in operation 7 months before they purchased the golf course. Then almost 17 years after the landfill started accepting waste the owners who live nearby started selling expensive lots around the golf course.
Now the owners are surprised there are some smells and paper blowing around? Also keep in mind that they are really suing the county taxpayers (who own the landfill) many of which are their customers for golfing and food because of their business decisions. Given the time line does this make any sense to you?
Pete Pfankuch, Crivitz
Marinette County Taxpayer
Recent stories, opinions and photos