LETTERS: Iran’s nuclear program doesn’t deserve U.S. protection

U.S. responsibility

While there are many aspects of the agreement with Iran to wonder and worry about, one that I have not seen discussed is an item in one section which states "E3/EU+3 … are prepared to cooperate with Iran on the implementation of nuclear security guidelines. …Cooperation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran's ability to protect against, and respond to, nuclear security threats, including sabotage, as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems."

In plain English, this says the United States promises to assist Iran in thwarting any attempt by anybody (in this case, I guess you can read that as "Israel") to sabotage, either physically or by cyber methods, Iran's nuclear development program.

I can understand that, as part of the agreement, the United States would promise to not sabotage any part of Iran's program, which now has been legitimized. I do not understand why we should now find ourselves allied with Iran in trying to assure that its nuclear agenda can proceed unhindered by any other party in the world. That should be Iran's own risk and responsibility, not ours.

Stewart Blumenfeld

Las Vegas

Same-sex marriage

At no time in my 80 years on this earth have I seen a job where the employee can do or not do whatever he or she chooses. Usually, when being hired, the duties and expectations of the position are outlined for the prospective employee and, where necessary, instruction is provided. If the duties are not performed as expected, the employee is fired. No one can design the requirements for his/her job based on personal beliefs, regardless of who on the outside supposedly provided the authority to do so.

A person born or naturalized in the United States is a citizen, and as such, must obey the laws of the land. Since our country was founded on the principle of separation of church and state, a U.S. citizen has the right to choose any religion to follow, or none at all. Citizenship and religion are not interchangeable. One is mandated to follow the laws of the country, but not mandated to observe belief in a supernatural or human being. Our laws are determined by the Constitution, not by the Bible or any other work of literature. Not following legislated laws is punishable. Not following religious doctrine is not.

Kim Davis, the clerk for Rowan County, Ky., has no right to determine what she will or will not do at her job based on her personal religious beliefs. If she does not like the duties of the job, she should resign. There is no place for her personal beliefs in the execution of her duties. All requests for marriage licenses should be granted for unmarried couples regardless of their sex. That is the law as determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. No state in the union is exempt, and the order does not have to be tested and retested every time someone's personal philosophy is in the way.

Sheila Morse

Henderson

Health care reality

I would like to express my disgust with the deceptive information Republican Sen. Dean Heller presented in his op-ed ("Cadillac tax a health care car crash," Tuesday Review-Journal). Sen. Heller says 1.3 million Nevadans covered under an employer-sponsored health plan are going to be taxed on that benefit in the future. "Whether you're a public employee, a union employee or you work in a manufacturing plant, many Nevadans are going to feel the wrath of the Obamacare 'Cadillac tax.'"

I am a public employee. The state pays $8,320 for my entire family's health insurance premiums. For that, I pay a nearly $9,000 deductible, plus several hundred dollars a month in insurance premiums. That deductible is my income, taxed at my federal rate. For those with "Cadillac plans" (certainly not offered to any state employee), their employer is realistically giving them a much larger salary by paying a large part of the health care costs, including little to no deductible. I fully support the idea of taxing those employees for their amazing health benefits — a boost in salary, even one not delivered by paycheck, is still income. In fact, I'd love to have someone with a Cadillac plan swap with me for a year — their plan, taxed, will still be better than mine.

I'd like to ask Sen. Heller to please tell us just how many Nevadans have a Cadillac plan in which their employer pays $27,500 in premiums for their family (three times what mine pays) or $10,200 for an individual. My suspicion, based on the casino workers, construction workers, nonprofit workers, small business employees and public employees I know, is that nearly no one in Nevada will be subject to a "Cadillac tax," because our health benefits are equivalent to a Chevy Spark.

Denise Signorelli

Las Vegas

Draft-dodging or luck?

George Haushahn's letter concerning Donald Trump not serving in the military during the Vietnam War is off base on many levels, including the fact that he fails to mention that neither President Bill Clinton nor President Barack Obama served in the armed forces ("Trum and the military," Monday Review-Journal). I am not a Trump supporter, but the draft-dodger charge is ridiculous.

My late husband was born about the same time as Mr. Trump. He received two deferments (for being a teacher and a father), then got a high number (342) in the lottery. If Mr. Haushahn had looked up Mr. Trump's birthdate, he would have discovered that his lottery number was 356. Mystery solved. Being lucky is not the same as being a draft dodger.

Miriam Samuels

Mesquite