> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Lower taxes can be a silent killer



  This is an open letter to the women and mothers of Indiana, to small government zealots and to the alleged pro-lifers who are more vocal about the “rights” of a blastocyst than about the rights of a living toddler.

Three-year-old Carmen Ellis of Indianapolis is the latest child victim to suffer and die at the hands of her mother’s boyfriend. The mother must also bear the responsibility for not keeping her child safe, and we have yet to learn how and why Child Protective Services failed Carmen, even after a relative intervened and reported the abuse.

But I know this. When state budgets are cut to the bone, due to decreased federal funding and less tax revenue overall, the first things to go are funds for social services that help the most vulnerable. That means fewer social workers and bigger caseloads. How can we complain about taxes, and vote against funding for family planning for poor women, when federal tax rates are the lowest in 60 years?

Never in our history have we cut taxes while at war. How do we justify electing people who vow to outlaw abortion while promising cuts to food stamps, Head Start, housing and other programs that are crucial for the children they insist be born? So the rich can get even more tax cuts? Really? How about using some of those funds to teach new parents the developmental stages of a child, and coping strategies to use when they feel overwhelmed?

Ask yourself, do you really want to reduce government to nothing but prisons, military and police, like say, Somalia? Do you care if the children and families already clinging to the margins fall deeper into destitution? Can you build a big enough fence around your gated community to insulate yourself from their misery? Or do you want to live in an actual society, which confers responsibility on its members to look out for one another? Because at some crisis point, you could be one of those “others.” Community versus every body on her own.

That’s what your taxes help you buy, along with food inspections, airplane safety, an interstate highway system and a safety net, hopefully, for the next Carmen. As Oliver Wendell Holmes reportedly said: “I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization.”

— Ruthanne Wolfe, New Albany



Todd and Todd— two peas in a pod



U.S. Rep. Todd Akin made an irrevocable blunder in an interview recently when he attempted to defend his radical opposition to abortion with the absurd claim that “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

In the days following the interview, Republican big wigs have called for the congressman to step down, but he refuses to give up his seat. Instead, he continues to defend his extreme position that abortions should be prohibited — even in cases of rape and incest.

While Akin’s statement about “legitimate rape” is both factually inaccurate and grossly offensive, there is cause to be grateful for the publicity that he has drawn. It is important for voters to know that while Todd Akin’s comments are regarded by most as repulsive, his statement was actually echoing language from an anti-abortion bill [H.R. 3] that Akin co-sponsored with Rep. Todd Young. The bill claimed that the only exceptions to the ban on abortion would be “if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest.”

Abortion should be an option for all victims of rape and incest. If this bill were passed, a huge number of pregnant rape and incest victims would have no other choice but to carry the pregnancy to term. What’s more is that the Republican Party has now adopted this maniacal stance as part of its official platform.

The most troubling part of this picture for me — as a woman and as a member of the 9th Congressional District of Indiana — is that my representative, Young, is a co-sponsor to H.R. 3. The provisions in this bill are a violent attack on women. Victims of rape and incest often suffer the implications of their traumatic experience for the rest of their lives, and I find it disgusting that Young has presumed that he should have the power to dictate to a rape or incest victim that they must carry their pregnancy to term.

I am deeply offended that anyone would suggest that there are certain kinds of rape and incest for which it is acceptable to force a woman to bear the child and I am disappointed that my representative shares these misogynistic and savage views with Akin.

— Chelsea Dresner, Floyds Knobs