LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Supports Texas ultrasound law

Mar 23, 2012


The series in question was not objectionable because of the topic of abortion, it was offensive because of its strong pro-abortion slant, treating the topic of life and death as merely a topic of political satire.

A recent joint letter from Barb, Patricia, Connie, Joan, Mary, Cathy, Betty, Ellie and Margaret expressed their support of the "Doonesbury" comic strip and their disappointment that those seeking an abortion in Texas are required by state law to undergo an ultrasound: a procedure they describe as "unnecessary, expensive and uncomfortable." How could any medical procedure be deemed too unnecessary, expensive or uncomfortable when it could open the eyes of even one mother to the growing life within her?

Ladies, in your letter you refer to abortion as "a difficult decision." Please consider this and ask yourselves why you all describe abortion this way. If there were no negative moral, spiritual or religious implications to this "legal medical procedure," then why would it be a difficult decision?

Barb, Patricia, Connie, Joan, Mary, Cathy, Betty, Ellie and Margaret: please take a moment, think about the joy your own families have given you, and consider the wonder of looking at your own grandchildren. Look at the beauty of your own lives and allow the scales to fall from your eyes. Allow yourselves to turn away from the current culture of death, and revel in the beauty and sanctity of life.

— Judy Celano, Grand Haven Township



I am amazed that in this day and age both sides of an issue are not allowed to be seen or heard? As a woman I will not stand for anyone who deems it necessary to take away my right to choose what I do with my body, let alone use emotional blackmail to force me into invasive medical procedures that cause me pain or discomfort. The difficulty with the whole abortion debate is we as a society are actually discussing two totally different topics. Ms. Celano you say abortion is wrong and so are anti abortion, and you are entitled to your opinion. However I am neither for or against abortion, I am pro-choice which is something different. I was lucky and never in a position to have to make the difficult decision of having an abortiont, and Ms. Celano it is a difficult decision which has nothing to do with spirituality or religious beliefs, just as deciding to have any medical procedure is a difficult decision. I am sorry you have such a closed mind and are not willing to listen to the other side of a debate, maybe if you took the time to explore the other views to the abortion debate you might be a little more tolerant. The whole idea of a debate is both sides being allowed to present their views, suppressing the opposing view will not make it go away.


I am also amazed that TCDIVA is accusing Ms. Celano of being closed minded when TCDIVA says that abortion has nothing to do with spirituality, well God is spiritual and ppl having abortions are killing what God created. Ms. Celano did not do any name calling but only expressed her opinion, I understand we all have opinions as do I but u don't have to put anyone down in order to express them.

Jeremiah 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

Jeremiah 29:11
"For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future."


Yes, we are all entitled to our opinions, of course! I think it is great we are having this debate on a public forum. I also want to drill home that I am very much respectful of your spirituality and religion and personal morals and beliefs. But there is a reason that we have laws separate from religion. You quote these passages from the Bible, but based on the context in which you use them, I can see that you clearly understand them, and interpret them, quite differently than I do.

By the way, what is your opinion of Texas' law on capital punishment? Just wondering since those on death row are also children of God. And I find it quite ironic that the state of Texas has executed more inmates than any other state.




the point of political satire isn't to make a statement that everyone has to agree with... it is to encourage conversation above anything else... I think its kind of weak to not publish something just because some may consider it to be controversial or they or the editor who decided to pull it didn't agree with it... that type of ignorance is exactly what is wrong with the news, media and society altogether


Applauding the decision to not publish the strip is about as ignorant as it gets... YOU are happy because it looked like something YOU didn't agree with? sounds pretty conceited... Lord forbid someone else could have a thought that offends YOU... oh yeah... I guess YOU and YOUR opinion are always correct.


Many studies show that once you factor out abortions performed because of a catastrophic medical reason involving the fetus, the woman, or both, the number of abortions performed during good economic conditions goes down, and increases during uncertain economic conditions. IMO, the Texas legislature, or any political body, has no business dictating women's reproductive rights, including contraception, abortion, and reproductive health services. Instead, they should be focusing on making the economy as strong and vital as possible, so women and their partners can work and make a living wage to support children. They should provide health services at low or no cost to poor women or women who, for a short time ( temporarily between jobs,etc) may need contraception, etc. They should work at keeping health care costs affordable for middle class women who have insurance and can pay for it. Education on issues of all areas of pregnancy, child care, contraception, abortion, and adoption should be stressed. Women should be supported and encouraged to make their own decisions, not forced into a corner with their rights seriously threatened, dictated to by politicians whose motivation seems curiously more about power and control than religion. Abortion is a legal right in this country, as is religious freedom. Government has no business eroding either right.


I totally respect those of you who are religious and quoting from the bible. I am a Christian and I go to church weekly too. But I submit that those are YOUR beliefs and MY beliefs, your faith and mine, not the law. A woman should have sovereignty over her own body. PERIOD.

Michael Johnson

...is, of course, quoting the Bible selectively. For instance, "From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. 'Go up baldhead,' they shouted, 'go up baldhead!' The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces." (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB) So, I guess if kids mock or laugh at someone, it is a good object lesson to KILL them. Or this gem: "'Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, 'Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple.' So they began by killing the seventy leaders. 'Defile the Temple!' the LORD commanded. 'Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!' So they went throughout the city and did as they were told.'" (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT) Apparently, sometimes the Bible itself "treats the topic of life and death" remarkably casually. This is only to point out the disparate and contradictory claims that books of faith involve; the Bible is neither alone in this nor exempt, but claiming it as an internally coherent source for modern moral decisions is not nearly as straightforward or as simple as some might claim. Of course, if we want to claim "literal" proof, all of these arguments are actually logical inconsistencies - you cannot argue anything from a LACK of proof...and the fact is that the word "abortion" appears NOWHERE in the Bible, Old Testament or New, and therefore no actual literal claim can be made, based on literal Biblical evidence, that God prohibits them. There is plenty of evidence and literal verses that show God condemning murder and protecting children...as long as they belong to nations who worship Him. And there is plenty of evidence that God also will not hesitate to condemn even children to death if it suits His purposes. Of course, people can "believe" whatever they wish - that is their CHOICE...which is protected under the Constitution. As should other choices be.

As for the comic strip "Doonesbury"...well, I don't actually think the topic of life and death was being satirized - it was the hypocritical response to issues of life and death that was being satirized - such as violating a woman's body to prevent her violating her own body. But then, it is hard to see that when newspapers favor cowardice over giving an artist the license to express him or herself without prior judgement.


Judy.... oh boy where to start???

The Tribune did a great disservice to its readers by choosing to cave and not print the Doonesbury satire last week, did you read them? It's a matter of free press, and the Tribune caving in shows that it possess no journalist integrity what so ever. I've often thought of the paper as a bit on the weak side of the Journalist scale, and have always referred to it as the Grand Haven Fish Wrapper, but to participate in censorship of a nationally syndicated column, normally run in the paper, over a single stance on one issue really shows the incompetence of the staff. I’ll still read, never pay for, but read this rag just because it is our only local choice but, never confuse it with journalism, it’s just good for a chuckle and wrapping salmon.

On to the next issue, pro-choice or pro-forced-childbearing? For real? This society is still arguing this point? Very simple solution for you, against abortion, don’t get one, no one is forcing anyone to have them, same as no one is forcing people not to chose that option. I cannot find your logic in the stance that it is our business as a society to forcibly make people rear children into a situation where they may not be emotionally, financially or for any reason of not being able to provide a positive, caring atmosphere verses allowing them to terminate the pregnancy. And I really have a hard time in the case of rape, abuse, and especially when the life of the mother is in danger, but, those are pretty self-explanatory. I expect this stance to be unpopular in the “West Coast Bible Belt” of Mi, but that is exactly why it needs be said. Hey, we just need to improve the technology, if your against abortion, why do we not just find a way to transplant the embryo another womb, once we do that, all the people, (well at least women) against it can be put into a pool of forced baby carriers. If someone wants an abortion we just transplant to the pool of carriers, if they want to or not.


"Transplanting FETUSES? No...that is something Christ would do!" -George Carlin


Post a Comment

Log in to your account to post comments here and on other stories, galleries and polls. Share your thoughts and reply to comments posted by others. Don't have an account on GrandHavenTribune.com? Create a new account today to get started.