Re “The Facts Win Out on Abortion,” by Linda Greenhouse (column, June 28):
The fact that did not win out in the most recent Supreme Court ruling on abortion is that in each successful abortion a human life is lost. That is a fact whether you acknowledge the humanity of the unborn child based on a genetic argument, a religious one or as a self-evident truth, or even if you indulge in the rationalization that the fetus is merely a potential human.
Old Bridge, N.J.
Note from KBJ: To progressives, fetuses are collateral damage.
It's hard to tell from reading this whether (1) the author is thin-skinned or (2) there really is a bullying problem in medicine. Anyone have any first-hand experience? What makes me think it's a case of thin skin is that the author, a woman, uses terms such as "micro-aggression." Is sounds as though her mission in life is to bring (white) male doctors to heel.
Thanks to Ann Friedman for calling out the online content users who don’t pay for the journalism and music they regularly enjoy or tip Uber drivers. (“Should we tip online?” Opinion, June 24)
I don’t see how any intelligent, self-respecting person can rationalize that behavior. I am a lifelong newspaper and periodical subscriber and I only read the content online to which I subscribe. I know the day is coming when my daily newspapers won’t be delivered to my doorstep anymore, but I am hoping that day is still a long way off.
In the meantime, I’ll continue to appreciate and happily support the amazing work of journalists, while listening all day to public radio that I also support. And though I don’t have much use for Uber, I most certainly tip the driver anytime I use that service. I can’t imagine not doing that.
Lynne Vermillion, Santa Barbara
Note from KBJ: Does the letter writer know what advertisements are, and what they are for? Every time I visit the website of the New York Times, I am bombarded with advertisements. That's how I pay for the "privilege" of reading the rag.
Many or most teenagers are going to have sex whether we want them to or not, so, given the adverse consequences of ignorant or unprotected sex, we may as well (1) teach them about sex and (2) provide them with condoms.
With this reasoning:
Many or most teenagers are going to own guns eventually, so, given the adverse consequences of ignorant or careless gun usage, we may as well (1) teach them how to handle and shoot guns and (2) provide them with guns (so that they may become familiar with them).
The reasoning is analogous, so why do progressives have different attitudes toward sex education and gun education?