Some noise a small price to pay for protection

Re: the June 29 article, “A-10 retirement plan raises stakes for D-M noise critics.”

About the  comment by Rita Ornelas in the article — “It was terrible — the noise was continuous for 20 minutes.” What about the thousands of our young men and women serving our country to protect our freedom? I wonder if they can endure the “terrible” noise for more than 20 minutes at a time?

As a veteran of the United States Air Force, I resent this type of remark. Having the inconvenience of “noise pollution” is a small price to pay for the protection of our country. What about the price the thousands of our servicemen have paid, giving their lives for this protection? I don’t think they would have complained of this noise.

I understand how difficult it can be, living in an area near Davis-Monthan, with the aircraft landing and taking off on their training missions, but we just have to accept the fact that this is the small price we pay for our protection.

Jack Patyk

Retired, Tucson

Hobby Lobby position inaccurately portrayed

I am amazed that the people on the left have the gall to lie about the Supreme Court’s decision in Hobby Lobby’s favor on their refusal to supply certain medicines for birth control. They claim that Hobby Lobby is denying women all birth control, and nothing could be further from the truth. The company pays for 16 types of drugs and apparatus to prevent conception, but not the four types that kill the fertilized egg after conception.

The definition of contraception, according to Webster, is the prevention of pregnancy or conception, and that is wholly what Hobby Lobby is opposed to, the killing of a fertilized egg or fetus. All these political left-wing pundits running around spouting these terrible accusations that women should have the right to birth control (i.e. contraception) should look before they speak. They sound so ridiculous.

Lee Richardson

Retired, Tucson

Pima County taxpayers should get tax reduction

Earlier this year Pima County Board of Supervisors approved a property tax hike, supposedly needed to meet budget requirements. Now, because the county wants to buy a parcel of land to build another soccer field, budget money miraculously has been found.

Apparently, there was a year-end surplus of $2 million to $3 million. Couple that with another $24 million available from the general fund. My question is, if there is some $26 million readily available, why didn’t tax payers get a tax reduction rather than a tax increase?

America, wake up! We are being duped by those we put in office.

Didn’t we learn a lesson from the millions wasted on the baseball complex, which did not attract a baseball team?

Pima County needs a new soccer field about as much as Tucson needs more street cars.

Henry Selfridge

Retired Air Force, Tucson

Rothman had an impact, deserved Star coverage

I was disappointed that the Star neglected to report on the recent passing of Martha Rothman. Martha was a community leader for more than 40 years in Tucson with impact around the state.

Often on the list of the 100 most influential people in Arizona, Martha was a past Woman of The Year, Founder of the Year, and Jefferson Award Winner.In the 1960s, Martha began her community service by volunteering with the National Council of Jewish Women and United Way.

She helped to establish the Helpmobile and went on to identify the needs for working families to have affordable childcare options for the United Way. Realizing her dream, she founded Tucson Association for Childcare in 1970, currently Child and Family Resources.

Martha had a lifelong commitment to the community, especially children and families, and was an inspiration to all she touched.

Suzanne Kaiser

Business owner, Tucson

Heed Eisenhower’s warning on wars

Re: the July 6 guest opinion “It’s past time to get serious about sealing the border.”

I agree with Richard Humphries that we do need an immigration policy for the 21st century. What is wrong with his views is to have the military patrol our borders. Countries that are doing so are not democracies. This is strictly a law enforcement issue.

Also most illegal immigrants are here to work, not to be on welfare or trying to get a handout. If he cares to check it out, he will be surprised at what ethnic group gets the most welfare in this country.

What really intrigued me is, he states that more than a million illegal immigrants self-deported back in 1953. What did they do? Go by the Immigration and Naturalization Service and said, “Goodbye, we’re leaving.” Yeah, right. This country spends billions on wars and on the military war complex. President Eisenhower warned this nation about that in his farewell speech.

We as a nation should try to help these poor countries to be more sufficient, then maybe their people would stay and work in their own country.

Genaro Moreno

Retired, Tucson

Border crossers are really refugees

I was just reading about the more than 50 million people worldwide who have fled violence in their home countries and sought shelter in other countries. They are called refugees and, if not necessarily wholeheartedly welcomed, are recognized as such and offered assistance.

The people flooding through our southern borders today are called illegal immigrants and are vilified by many of the cruder so-called Americans. These border crossers are being incorrectly defined. They are refugees fleeing violence in their native countries.

Let us redefine the situation and take proper care of our refugee brothers and sisters. Perhaps those crude demonstrators would even approve of our asking the United Nations for assistance.

Maris Bootzin

Retired editor, Tucson