ROANOKE TIMES

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, August 25, 1994                   TAG: 9408260005
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-12   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Long


NO RETURN TO BACK-ALLEY ABORTIONS

FREDRICK WILLIAMS asked in his Aug. 11 letter to the editor (``Pro-choice on shaky moral ground''), ``On what moral ground does the pro-choice movement condemn the murder of abortionists?'' This is a no-brainer.

Murder is illegal in every state in this nation. To commit murder is to break laws that bind civilized society. Abortion is legal in this nation at the earliest stages of pregnancy. A woman's right to have an abortion has been upheld on numerous occasions by the U.S. Supreme Court since the Roe vs. Wade decision.

In the early '70s, I don't remember an uproar being played out in the media over the legalization of abortion. And I think I may know why. At that time, people remembered, or personally knew, what women had to endure to obtain abortions. I'm talking about the back-alley, kitchen-table, unsanitized kind of abortions that were available then.

During the last march on Washington for pro-choice rights, I talked to a doctor from Norfolk who remembered women who were on his hospital's abortion ward. They had been brutally disfigured, and some died, as a result of having an illegal abortion. I also walked beside a young woman who told me about her grandmother, whom she never knew, because the grandmother had died in the '20s after having an abortion.

As years have passed, these memories have dimmed and, fortunately, women no longer are subjected to this kind of treatment. I don't want any woman in this nation to ever have to face that degradation, humiliation or their own deaths again.

Let's get this behind us. Abortion is legal and should remain legal. To change that would be to take a giant leap backwards.

JUDY MORRIS

FINCASTLE

North exemplifies declining values

YOU DON'T have to be a liberal elitist to see that Oliver North is a hypocrite.

North admitted he lied to Congress about covert activities. He admitted accepting illegal and unreported gifts from a known arms dealer while he was a government employee. He admitted illegally shredding government documents. For these acts, he was convicted by a jury of his peers.

Although his convictions were set aside on a technicality, the fact remains: North broke the law, and admitted doing so. He has refused to take responsibility for his crimes. He blames the press, Democrats and everyone but himself.

North isn't the solution to declining moral values, as he claims. In my book, he's part of the problem.

CREED JONES

DAMASCUS

Don't write off insurance savings

REGARDING the Aug. 8 Business article ``College plans are scams in disguise'':

The article, which portrays insurance as a bad investment for college, was written by someone who lacks knowledge of insurance products and overall financial planning. Jane Bryant Quinn, the writer, also penalizes the entire insurance industry for the acts of one company.

Recently, I've helped parents start saving money for their children's college education. As a Life of Virginia representative, I usually recommend a variable or universal life product, depending on the investment risk my client wants to take. These products have many advantages over savings and other investment plans.

The example used in her article shows that a 35-year-old female can amass $37,000 by putting $1,000 a year into a mutual fund with an average annual return of 10 percent over a 15-year period. This is true; however, tax consequences weren't mentioned. Mutual-fund owners must pay taxes on dividends every year, whether taken as cash or reinvested, and on any gain when shares are sold. Thus, the $37,000 is really much less.

If the mutual fund was bought into through a flexible premium-variable life-insurance policy, there are no taxes on dividends. And through preferred loans, one can take money out, tax-free. Of course, some of the investment goes toward the purchase of insurance, which is another advantage of using insurance policies. Should the person funding the policy die, the death benefit can be used for the child's education. The policy can also be set up to continue if the owner becomes disabled and unable to pay premiums. Ms. Quinn obviously forgot to mention tax consequences of mutual funds and the advantages of insurance policies.

Furthermore, the article displays a horrid generalization of these college-savings plans by using examples from one company and assuming the rest of the industry acts in the same manner. I can understand a journalist not completely comprehending insurance or financial planning, but I cannot excuse her for the extremely evident hasty generalization.

MICHAEL T. BUCCIERO

ROANOKE

Boosterism stops at valley's borders

YOUR NEWSPAPER is to be commended for its coverage of the possibility of national media attention that soon might be focused on the Roanoke Valley (Aug. 9 news article, ``Come to the Roanoke Valley: We'll do lunch'').

It's refreshing to see front-page space devoted to such a community spirit-booster as the speculation of interest in your area by outsiders, particularly when presented in such a positive manner. The valley was described enthusiastically by your staff writer as a ``do-gooder environmental community'' that's ``fun, wacky,'' ``interesting,'' ``very hot,'' possessing vast ``environmental virtues,'' and being a ``microcosm of firsts.''

It's extremely distressing, however, to read further into the newspaper and discover that community-mindedness extends no further than the valley borders. Another news article (``Wilder makes his lucky stop''), in the same issue by another staff writer, describes the Martinsville-Henry County area as a ``gritty Southside manufacturing town'' with a ``stucco windmill that looms over Route 220.''

Such subjective characterizations by the newspaper have become the norm. Here are the topics that have received the most attention from this newspaper over the past year: bank embezzlement, union strife, employment downsizing, and the preacher with two wives. Does the Roanoke Times & World-News consider this to be a fair and accurate depiction of our community?

The Martinsville-Henry County area has its share of blemishes and problems, as does the Roanoke Valley, and wouldn't attempt to hide them. But while we welcome your coverage here, some balance would be appreciated.

WORTH HARRIS CARTER JR.

Chairman of the Board and President

Patrick Henry National Bank

BASSETT

No excuse for distasteful cartoon

NO WAY can I not write to express utter disgust with the tasteless Benson cartoon on your Aug. 12 Opinion page, depicting Ms. Faulkner as being in the same category as a young woman in a Nazi labor camp. The Citadel has a long and distinguished record that can in no way be compared to a Nazi labor camp and the horror of the Holocaust.

Benson should be thoroughly ashamed and chastised for such an unthinkable display. Just imagine how those who survived that horror of persecution during World War II must feel. If he did this for laughs, I doubt many are laughing. If he did it to make a point, I fail to see it.

Ms. Faulkner had a choice in her selection of schools. The other young woman depicted in the cartoon certainly would never have chosen to be in a labor camp.

As for the Roanoke Times & World-News, I'm surprised and disappointed it would run this very offensive cartoon.

FRANCES S. TATE

BLACKSBURG

Goodlatte's crime vote is confusing

THE FOLLOWING confuses me.

The Fraternal Order of Police stated it supported the president's crime bill, especially the part banning assault weapons. The National Rifle Association stated it opposed the crime bill, especially the part banning assault weapons. Congressman Bob Goodlatte ran for office declaring his opposition to ``special interests'' and his support for law and order.

Goodlatte has stated that he opposes the crime bill, especially the part banning assault weapons. My confusion is this: Does he consider police officers to be a special interest because they are especially interested in staying alive instead of being killed by criminals armed with TEC-9 assault pistols? Or does he consider it a law that he must do as the gun lobby ``orders''?

My confusion extends to wondering just why it is that no candidate has declared to run against Goodlatte? It would be nice to get someone who really opposes special interests and who supports police officers.

ROBBY W. BURKE

HARRISONBURG



 by CNB