Constitutionís purpose misread
As a newly returned Hoosier after a 44-year absence, I must add the Constitution of the State of Indiana to my required reading list to see what else it contains (Tax caps hindering schools, Feb. 23).
My understanding is that a constitution is a statement of rights and responsibilities and how the state is to function and conduct its governance for the people of Indiana. A constitution should not be the repository of issues fomented by special interest groups; hot button political, social and economic topics of the moment; tax policy; or a document for social engineering.
For this reason, I have adamantly been against any efforts to enshrine flag desecration or any social issues in a state constitution. These are issues that belong more appropriately to the state legislature and, hence, the people of Indiana.
Not long ago, many state constitutions prohibited miscegenation. Is Indiana going to continue along this same road? Did I come back to the state of Indiana or a banana republic?
EMORY EARL TOOPS Fort Wayne
Abortion reports show the real issue
Complaints about abortion providers uncovered a few tardy reports of abortions of 13-year-olds. Pregnancy in 13-year-olds is always unfortunate.
Indiana deems mutual consent between 13-year-olds invalid. Neither is considered a victim of rape; it is mutual abuse. Without knowing the partner’s age, it’s not correct to say a 13-year-old was a victim of rape, as activists and journalists have done.
Dr. Ulrich Klopfer sometimes informs parents that neighboring states have different reporting laws. Reporting 13-year-olds can be harmful, carrying risk of suicide and violence as well as creating barriers to health care. The position of the Society of Adolescent Medicine is that mandatory reporting laws based only on age are detrimental and sexual activity shouldn’t be presumed sexually abusive.
The problem isn’t abortion providers. The problem is that the state doesn’t commit to 13-year-olds’ sexuality education, health care and opportunity.
CAROLYN MEAGHER and SUE ELLEN BRAUNLIN Co-presidents, Indiana Religious Coalition for Reproductive Justice
Heuer loses credibility in district
I thought Kathy Heuer, my state representative in District 83, was someone who would stand on principle. I am disappointed that Heuer helped deny Hoosiers the opportunity to vote on Indiana’s definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.
Heuer first voted to remove a key sentence from the resolution, which watered down its effectiveness. The real atrocity is that Heuer voted against the people making the decision. Once approved by both houses, amendments to the Indiana Constitution must be voted on by citizens of Indiana in a general election. Her vote against the final resolution denied the people the opportunity to decide.
The public must be made aware that after voting to change and render the amendment useless, she then voted against the final resolution that contained the changes she supported.
This is an example of legislative foolishness or political brilliance. Often the two are one in the same. With opposing stances on this issue and denying the people the opportunity to decide, I see no justification for Heuer to continue to represent the people of District 83.
BILL WILLCUTTS Fort Wayne
Nisly understands need for change
There has come a cry from the people of the 22nd District: They want representation – a voice that believes and votes their wishes and beliefs!
Now you might also wonder why I care.
When votes are cast, no matter where they’re from, they affect all of us. Not only that; but I work and shop in the 22nd District. I am involved in the Kosciusko County GOP, Kosciusko County Silent No More and am a member of the Lunchpail Republicans.
I met Curt Nisly at last year’s Kosciusko County Lincoln Day Dinner. When he called me to say he was considering a run for the 22nd District representative seat, we met and talked about why he wanted to run and what he could do for not only the district but what Nisly could and would do to restore the GOP to what it once was.
Nisly has a desire to serve and a conviction to protect the people’s rights and freedoms.
After enduring the lack of representation and attacks (not only in vote, but verbal communication) on our freedoms as an American citizen and Hoosier for the last four years, I feel it is time for a change. It’s my pleasure as a Lunchpail Republican to endorse Nisly in his run for our District 22 representative seat.
GEORGE A. DOCKERY Larwill