Thursday, April 01, 2004
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
LETTERS: Abstinence-only sex education is lacking
To the editor:
Regarding your March 11 story, "Abstinence pledge doesn't reduce STDs":
So, teens who took a pledge to remain virgins until marriage caught sexually transmitted diseases about as often as those who didn't pledge. Worse yet, communities with high percentages of virginity-pledgers had the highest rate of STDs.
It seems that although the virginity-pledgers had fewer sex partners, they were less likely to use condoms.
Teens should receive comprehensive sex education to be made aware of all the methods for disease prevention and contraception, along with the pros and cons. Then they can choose the method that they need, depending on their circumstances.
Abstinence-only sex education is not too different from teaching students to avoid eating any food other than water and crackers until marriage because some foods cause disease, and you will enjoy food so much more if you wait until you are married. In both cases, frustration, distraction and anger -- along with emotional and physical problems -- can result.
Abstinence-only is also similar to telling soldiers to avoid risky locations, but not telling them about the availability and usefulness of body armor.
This study indicates that abstinence-only sex education is lacking and should not be funded with taxpayer money.
RONALD JAMES
LAS VEGAS
Won't wash
To the editor:
Here we go again. Educators blaming parents; parents blaming educators and our children getting dumber. I don't know the real answer but it obviously is somewhere in between these blaming extremes.
Lynne Gallagher writes: "To blame Carlos Garcia for the "failure" of the Clark County School District is ignorance itself." Oh, really? Can we say, then, that it is ignorant to blame any executive for the failure of his organization? Don't think so, but apparently Lynne Gallagher has a better approach to executive responsibility.
Speaking of ignorance, the statement, "A leader is only as strong as his troops" is not coming from the strongest battery in the flashlight. A leader must be stronger than his troops in stamina, judgement and character. He must nurture, guide, push and do all humanly possible to accomplish the goals of his office. If he really is only as strong as his troops, then why is he and not any one of his troops the leader? Should he fail, does he stand and say "It's the fault of my troops?"
Mr. Garcia and his supporters might like to do just this but I doubt it will wash.
AL CIRICILLO
LAS VEGAS
Phoned in
To the editor:
In his recent letter, Steve Herpolsheimer talked about his privacy regarding Albertson's new preferred savings card. I have another privacy issue which is so ridiculous, it's laughable.
We have an unlisted telephone number, and this is noted on our checks -- "phone unlisted." When I write a check at any local store other than grocery stores, I am always asked for my phone number.
When I say that it is unlisted, I am told, "We must have your telephone number on the check." I reply that I do not wish to give out my phone number and then the supervisor is called. She (usually a "she") says that she's sorry, but that they must have a phone number on the check. I will say, "Well, I could make one up," and am told, "That's fine, as long as there's a phone number written on the check." I have said, "123-4567," and the cashier has written it on my check and been satisfied.
Talk about ludicrous. What a waste of time and aggravation.
IRENE J. SCHWARZ
NORTH LAS VEGAS
Slippery slope
To the editor:
Supporters of liberal abortion laws are concerned that any limitation on abortion rights will be the first step onto the slippery slope leading to abortion prohibition. The slippery slope, however, may also slide in the other direction.
As abortions are allowed later in pregnancy, we may be moving toward the Singer Doctrine. Professor Peter Singer is a bioethicist at Princeton University who believes that newborns with birth defects should be subject to disposal during the first four weeks of life.
STAN AMES
HENDERSON
Doctor talk
To the editor:
As I read the recent article about the opening of the new Osteopathic Medical School in Henderson, I was taken aback by the comments of Dr. Mitchell Foreman, the school's dean.
Dr. Foreman tries to explain to the public the differences between osteopathic physicians and traditional medical doctors. Dr. Foreman is paraphrased as stating that osteopaths focus not only on the treatment of disease, but also on healthy lifestyles and disease prevention. This is not the first time that I have read such comments in the newspaper about the difference between D.O.s and M.D.s. Frankly, I am getting a little tired of the implication that D.O.s focus heavily on prevention while M.D.s simply treat illness after the fact.
Dr. Foreman knows better. Traditional medical doctors like me who practice primary care medicine spend hours each day counseling patients on weight loss, stopping smoking, eating correctly, exercising, getting preventative mammograms, prostate cancer screening and so on. No one type of physician regardless of training or philosophy has a monopoly on trying to get patients to practice a healthy lifestyle and get recommended disease prevention and screening tests. For Dr. Foreman to suggest otherwise is intellectually dishonest.
If Dr. Foreman wishes to detail some of the differences between D.O.s and M.D.s he could talk about their philosophy of using chiropractic type spinal manipulation as part of their treatment of disease or any other area of real difference. In the meantime he should retract his current position.
Dr. MARK E. McKENZIE
LAS VEGAS
Drug prices
To the editor:
The current administration in Washington advocates free trade between the Americas. Unfortunately, this does not include prescription drugs. Your recent article provides the answer: "The pharmaceutical industry made more than $20 million in political contributions in the past election, with roughly $8 out of every $10 going to Republicans."
JEANNE EBNER
LAS VEGAS
