LETTERS IN THE EDITOR'S MAILBAG.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Life begins at conception

I believe Thomas Jefferson was right when he said we should observe "those moral precepts only in which all religions agree (for all forbid us to steal, murder, plunder, or bear false witness)." Since America is a pluralistic nation, I believe this is sound advice.

Pat Hadley (letters, Feb. 7) states that "It is a scientific fact that a fetus cannot live outside the womb earlier than 23 weeks." If I understand correctly, Hadley believes that life begins when the fetus is able to survive outside the womb, for "it is a purely religious concept that life begins at conception."

Now, what exactly is in the womb prior to the aforementioned 23 weeks? Those cells which have developed into a fetus are very much alive; true, the fetus may not be able to survive outside the womb, but it is nonetheless quite living. It meets all the scientific requirements to be alive. So, to say that a fetus is not viable is a very different thing than saying that a fetus is not alive.

If a fetus is removed from the womb, it dies; therefore, it was once alive. Should we not along with Jefferson "observe those moral precepts - in which all religions agree?" Even science agrees with religion that a fetus is alive.

The question of life at conception is not just a moral issue, it is also a scientific fact.

DAVID E. ABBALE

Eugene

Pombo misleading on ANWR 

The recent letter by Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., is troubling (letters, Feb. 7). Pombo deliberately misleads us by giving the false impression that drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will provide us with independence from foreign oil for many years to come, claiming, "Median estimates predict ANWR could replace Saudi Arabian oil imports for nearly 30 years."

Let's check the facts. According to the United States Geological Survey, ANWR contains 10.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil. The United States currently consumes about 7.5 billion barrels per year of crude oil, with about 4.5 billion barrels imported from several countries, including about 0.58 billion barrels from Saudi Arabia, according to the government's Energy Information Administration Web site.

ANWR could supply all of our import needs for about two years at present import rates. Pombo misleads by considering only Saudi oil rather than all imports in his 30-year claim.

Pombo derides efforts toward conservation, claiming that big government's restrictions did not reduce our dependence on foreign oil. However, the savings from the modest 25 percent increase in fuel economy imposed by government standards in 1975 have already saved more than ANWR will ever produce.

Conservation, improved efficiency standards, energy taxes to reduce demand and an end to our perpetual-growth economic model will all be required to solve our energy problems - not half-truths from politicians beholden to business interests.

LIZ OLHSSON

Eugene

Use common sense on reforms

Social Security is not some kind of pension plan. It's a welfare program combined with a dedicated tax.

This is not a bad thing. We expect civilized countries to help those who are least able to support themselves, and governments get the money to do so from taxes.

When there aren't enough tax revenues to support the benefits, government can increase the taxes, cut the benefits, or both. We have a chance now to do a little of both and at the same time make Social Security not only more stable financially but also more progressive.

On the tax side, we can eliminate the completely arbitrary cap on taxable earnings. Why, from society's point of view, should the salaries of the highly paid be treated differently from the wages of those closer to the bottom of the income scale?

On the benefit side, isn't it time for a reasonably progressive means test to cut back on the welfare given to some of us who don't need it so much? Without the tax cap, highly-paid employees could even end up with larger benefits than now, based on greater contributions during their working years.

Neither of these sorts of changes should be imposed all at once - retirees like me would need time to adjust to a cut in benefits, but there's plenty of time to phase them in. They'd deal with the need to stabilize Social Security for future generations without radically changing the nature of the program.

CHARLES R.B. WRIGHT

Eugene

Retain what works in 4J schools

It is unfortunate that the debate about alternative schools seems to be obsessively centered on social engineering rather than preserving time-tested, progressive educational curricula that have benefited thousands of Eugene kids for 30 years.

Hopefully, future school board decisions will be based on educational criteria: Does the overall choice system allow 4J to provide challenging and unique programs for all parents and kids who want it?

Betsy Boyd (Register-Guard, Feb. 6) is honorable in her desire to level the playing field at all Eugene schools. It is a challenge that school boards across the nation face. But as Joe Thornton pointed out (Register-Guard, Jan. 30), eliminating choice only results in ghettoization of neighborhood schools by housing price - or the ability to pay for private schools or home school.

Education is ultimately a choice for parents. Current statistics show that alternative school populations include kids from diverse social, economic and ethnic backgrounds. Not every parent would appreciate the extra time and responsibility involved in having a child in a focused language, art or science program. Beyond that I happen to think that many neighborhood schools are educating their students quite well.

Let's make our first priority retaining the 4J programs that are working. It's important to separate our desire to social engineer from our desire to provide our kids with opportunities that give 4J a mark of distinction.

JANE BUREK

Eugene

Drug prohibition isn't working

I'd like to thank the editors for their concern about our county and state - our nation's - methamphetamine problem: "Fighting a meth scourge: Legislators should make new bills a priority" (Register-Guard, Feb. 2).

The truest part of the editorial was this simple statement: "Law enforcement officials readily admit they're losing the war against methamphetamine."

Well, yeah.

If the term "drug war" is exchanged for "prohibition," the true crux of the problem is laid bare. Prohibition is a policy doomed to failure. We proved that with our attempted prohibition of alcohol early in the 20th century.

Addiction is a medical problem. There is a pharmaceutical form of meth, Desoxyn, used to treat attention deficit disorder in children. It sells for about $2 per 5 mg dose. Its constituent ingredients are regulated to guarantee purity, its sales regulated through prescription and pharmacies. Meth, however, is as unregulated as it gets.

Prohibition creates a black market commodity and nullifies any establishment control or regulation, thus creating the criminality it purports to eliminate.

Our county, state and nation do indeed have a drug problem. Prohibition is the instigator and can never be the cure.

We have an epidemic of HIV and hepatitis in our prisons and among our needle-injecting drug users. We have an epidemic of irrational leadership when it comes to the war on (some) drugs.

What makes Lane County any different?

ALLAN ERICKSON, Member

Drug Policy Forum of Oregon

Eugene

Social Security needs options

Are most financial advisers going to give you the advice that benefits you maximally or the advice that brings them the best commission (sales charge)? My experience supports the latter.

For years, through a payroll deduction plan with no sales charge, I have been buying (with pre-tax dollars) shares in a mutual fund. I could have doubled my monthly investment in this well-performing fund, but two financial advisers sold me other funds instead and never mentioned my oversight.

Considering the investment naivete of the majority of the working public, why doesn't President Bush implement the needed Social Security changes in a more people-friendly, compassionate way?

If personal investment portfolios would outperform FICA investments, why doesn't the government put our money in a quality portfolio and pay benefits at a higher rate? And why not figure out a positive way to utilize the Social Security benefits not claimed due to premature death?

Maybe they could offer an array of options to each individual for his unused share; a person could will it to early childhood education, cancer research, disaster relief, child health care, etc. And then the government could make sure that these designated funds are not raided and administered well.

After all, we have an important family beyond our immediate one, and that bigger family's health nourishes our own.

MIKE HOROWITZ

Eugene

Photo captured Oregon winter

I was delighted to see such a stunning picture on the front page of a recent City/Region section (Register-Guard. Feb. 7). My congratulations to Chris Pietsch for capturing this image that so perfectly says Oregon winter. Thank you for starting our week on a bright note.

CHRISTINE STOCKDALE

Saginaw