Ronstadt mistaken on stem-cell view

Re: the Sept. 21 article “Singer dishes on her book, affliction.”

I am very sorry that Linda Ronstadt has Parkinson’s. No one should have to suffer from that disease. However, the Christian right is not against stem cell research per se. They are against fetal stem cell research that creates life to destroy it for research.

I resent being called stupid because I don’t agree with political views of someone who, if it weren’t for name recognition, wouldn’t have her views published on the front page of a newspaper. I won’t be reading Ronstadt’s book. I’m one of the stupid ones.

Deedee Bruster

Retired, SaddleBrooke

Flake needs to follow up on guns-for-all stance

Now is the time for Sen. Jeff Flake to act and reinforce his demonstrated position that every citizen has the right and ability to commit mass slaughter. If he introduces a bill that will make it illegal to conduct background checks, it could be Flake’s crowning achievement, even surpassing his hypocrisy when he reneged on his public support of the Senate’s recent background-check bill in April.

Flake could further enhance his position by introducing a companion bill to arm everyone over 6 years of age with a semiautomatic weapon (younger children would be limited to single-shot weapons). Think of the stimulus this would create for our lagging economy by ramping up the production of such weapons, along with all the ancillary equipment (bullets, gun racks, etc.) and support services such as shooting ranges, expanded ambulance services for shooting victims?

Jack Graef

Retired engineer, Tucson

Affordable Care Act deserves praise

Have you no sense of fair play? Have you no respect for the truth? The Arizona Daily Star printed three letters on Sept. 13, all lambasting the Affordable Care Act, and all devoid of the facts.

Tort reform, although I favor it, is not an alternative to the Affordable Care Act; it covers a tiny part of health care, as does allowing insurance providers to compete across state lines. The act is not “more forced charity.” It is people paying what they can afford for decent insurance. The insurance, in turn, pays health-care providers who otherwise would not have received payment for people in need but with no resources.

The act does not deserve to be defunded. It deserves to be praised. It has already saved many people money in health care. Rather than spending our energy on getting rid of the Affordable Care Act, we should concern ourselves with improving it.

Walter G. Mann

Retired, Tucson

Opposition to homes was mischaracterized

Re: the Aug. 30 column “We want infill — until it’s in our neighborhood.”

Tim Steller is a very creative but not always accurate writer. His column was just another example of slanted journalism. I have lived in the Sabino Vista area for 27 years and had never heard the term “infill” until our homeowners group alerted us to the sale of the first Sabino Canyon Road parcel. His use of the quote from a Tucson architect was telling. It said to me that one quote summarized how the populace must think.

I am sorry, but for the most part the average citizen does not understand the term “infill” or what the impact is until it is almost too late. We want to see the county use the land to enhance Fruchthendler Elementary School, to guard the ever precious water table and to avert increased congestion to the increasingly traveled gateway to Sabino Canyon — not to add to the overpopulation of the area.

Jim Slagle

Community activist, Tucson

Food idea minimizes parental responsibility

Re: the Sept. 2 guest column “We must fund child-nutrition programs fully.”

I have to respond to Casey and Punch Woods’ guest column promoting free food to all children 18 and under, regardless of need. Apparently, parents shouldering this responsibility are now a problem, not a solution. Instead, “it takes the whole nation to raise our children.”

Not many years ago, receiving charitable or government aid was a last resort, usually kept quietly within the family. Today these aid programs and the need for more funding are considered “entitlements,” minimizing the requirement by most to even make an effort to care for themselves and their family. There is no question that sometimes able-bodied people need outside help to survive a difficult time.

Usually this will be temporary. All government food programs should have fair and reasonable qualification guidelines — including an end. Nutrition is a parental responsibility assumed when having a child.

Tom Vana

Retired, Marana