Featured Stories

Other Pamplin Media Group sites



Warning: Missing argument 3 for artxTagBuilder(), called in /home/pmgmaster/cni.pmgnews.com/templates/cni_ht_03/classes/ArtxContentItem.php on line 112 and defined in /home/pmgmaster/cni.pmgnews.com/templates/cni_ht_03/functions.php on line 493

Letters to the Editor

Let the people be part of the democratic process

In my opinion Bernie enthusiasts have shown the broken system on both sides.

Although Clinton is a great candidate, Bernie has a message of basic need for this country to maintain a democratic society.

The Democratic National Committee and/or the Clinton campaign wish for Bernie to drop out. Why would it be democratic for the remaining states to not have a voice in the nomination process, especially California which holds large numbers of constituents?

In other countries we joke about them only having one candidate to vote for, but are we not doing the same with the institution picking the candidate before the convention?

We also hear the voices of Bernie’s fans deemed as poor sports, complainers and inappropriate.

Since when are the expressions of the people not considered part of the process?

Yes, some are out of line, but most are not, and the fact is you are not hearing Clinton supporters complaining of purging, voting issues or longlines.

The Constitution came to be through loud opinions, protests and even violence while trying to claim our independence from British rule. I continually receive “change is from the bottom,” which I agree, but with the amount of money at the top, the lower changes have little chance of getting the modifications that Bernie speaks of, like getting money out of politics.

If we claim to be a democratic country, then let us do as intended by the Constitution and let people speak, vote and be part of the complete democratic process.

Shannon Olsen

Beaverton

Patriarchy ‘alive and well’ in 21st century

Regarding the Hillsboro School Board’s contraception decision: The 4-3 vote along gender lines to deny contraceptive access to high school students tells me that patriarchy and subjugation of women’s’ roles is alive and well in the 21st century.

A recent study of the differences between girls’ experiences in the U.S. and the Netherlands reveals that in the U.S., it is young men who are the drivers of teen sexual activity. U.S. girls report that they are pressured into having sex by teenage boys even though the girls say they are unprepared for sexual activity.

They report that sex is all about the boys’ pleasure. And if they have sex, they’re labeled “slut” and if they don’t have sex, they are labeled “prude;” either way they lose.

The irony of the Hillsboro School Board’s decision to not allow Virginia Garcia to provide contraception is that Century High School has an onsite day care center for children of high school girls who want to finish their degree.

The message this sends only serves to perpetuate a “woman as bearer of the male seed” mentality.

It seems to me that young women in the 21st century need as much support as they can get in navigating the very confusing waters of adolescent sexuality.

Providing contraception is a simple way of preventing unwanted pregnancies and allowing young women to finish their education.

Sorah Dubitsky

Beaverton

Parents, not schools,

are the protectors

After perusing the Opinion page of this week’s Hillsboro Tribune (June 3, 2016), I am compelled to respond to a letter from Katie Riley. Katie was apparently disappointed by the recent outcome of the Hillsboro School Board’s decision to not allow contraceptives to be prescribed in school health clinics.

Having pointed out that the board members were being “intimidated” by signs held up by members of the public at the school board meeting, she seems to imply that there are too many parents abdicating their parental rights.How you might ask? By shirking their responsibilities to protect their children from harm. So I’m an irresponsible parent for not approving of my child being prescribed contraceptives at school?

First I would like to say that for the school medical staff to engage in prescribing contraceptives to students carries with it a tacit sense of approval of sexual activity among teens. A lot of parents would agree with this implication.

Secondly, ask just about any high school student and you will find out that they already know where to acquire contraceptives (free) if they want. And not far from school or home, either.

Katie’s statement regarding parental rights coming with responsibilities is true ... parents do need to make sure their children are protected to the best of their ability. I don’t know any parent that would wish a teen pregnancy for their daughter or son.

But many of us parents hold traditional (read “time tested”) views that it’s the parents, not the schools, that are to be the “protectors.” When school medical staff begin prescribing contraceptives — especially without parental consent — many parents feel their own rights to parent their own children are being sidelined.

Katie’s assertion that “Parent’s rights end when there is potential harm to the child by not making information and care available,” seems to imply that parents who do not want the schools to prescribe condoms and morning after pills have somehow deserted or abandoned the duties of parenthood, essentially abdicating their parental rights.

Actually, it’s more likely the opposing parents are standing up for their rights.

Bob Tucker

Hillsboro