LETTERS

Don’t fear screenings

Re the online survey done by JAMA Internal Medicine regarding the uncertainty and false alarms of screening mammograms: Fortunate women have normal results. Others are told they have abnormal high-risk conditions.

A recent article stated, “Whether you blame the doctors, the system or malpractice lawyers, it is a problem that needs to be fixed.” How can you blame someone for your abnormal result? Women need to be aware of abnormalities and follow up regularly to monitor them.

A screening mammogram saved my life. After 20-plus years of routine mammograms, I had an abnormal result. I had no breast lump, but had five small tumors in one breast. Early detection kept the cancer from spreading.

I encourage all women to have a screening mammogram. Do not let fear of an abnormal test cost you your life.

CLAUDIA BREWER

Springdale

Forcing agenda on us

I’m not a religious fanatic, but consider myself a Christian. I have lived-not just vacationed-all over the world. My father was a World War II veteran and worked for the Department of Defense. We traveled extensively when I was a child and a teenager.

I am also a 13-year Army veteran. I served one year in South Korea and two three-year tours in Europe, along with various locations in the U.S.

I wish the liberal media networks, and the naive, rich TV shows such as Saturday Night Live and Modern Family, would get a life. I think they are out of touch with reality. I doubt if any of the stars on such shows ever served their country such as I or the millions of veterans that have served and died for their country.

I’ve always had friends of all races. What your skin color is or what language you speak is not important to me. You treat me right and I’ll treat you right.

I would be lying to you, though, if I said I agreed with homosexuality. It seems like the gay agenda is to force its way of life on you, no matter what your beliefs are.

Arkansas voters voted to ban gay marriage, but the minority gay population apparently will not stop until it finds a legal loophole or a liberal federal judge to repeal this law. I don’t agree with all the comments Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty stated in GQ, but he has the right to free speech, as do all American citizens.

Kudos to A&E Network for reinstating Phil on one of my favorite shows. If you don’t agree and you condone the gay agenda, don’t watch the show.

DAVID McGRIFF

Berryville

Safeguard watershed

If you don’t think protecting our drinking water by safeguarding the watershed of Lake Maumelle, you might want to contact the people in and around Charleston, W.Va.

Move the flawed pipeline. And keep a sharp eye out for other polluters.

ART PFEIFER

Little Rock

Pile of burning leaves

Hooray for Denver. Hooray for marijuana and the tax dollars. Suppose there will be enough dollars to cover the needs of those addicted? Will there be help for those who cannot help themselves?

I hope and pray that Little Rock and its fine reputation will not be tainted by the scourge of the weed. Once was enough for me, several years ago in a small room with a low ceiling full of secondhand smoke. Very similar to a pile of burning leaves.

Once was enough! How about you?

VES PANKEY

McCrory

Taxpayers put in peril

Dana D. Kelley’s recent column on conditions leading to the shrinking of the middle class and how to correct it was the best I’ve seen on that subject. It seems the lure of big financial campaign contributions has both political parties knuckling under to the high-stakes gambling wishes of Wall Street banks, putting taxpayers and the country’s economy in jeopardy.

A classic example of what I’m talking about occurred Oct. 30, 2013, when the U.S. House voted to adopt House Resolution 992, the Swaps Regulatory Improvement Act. Two hundred and twenty-two Republicans (including all four of the Arkansas representatives) joined 70 Democrats in voting “aye.” Three Republicans and 119 Democrats voted “no.”

Prior to passage of this bill, bank transactions involving high-risk swapping of derivative bundles would be excluded from coverage under FDIC insurance. This bill would grant coverage on those high-risk swaps. Fortunately, the Senate has not taken any action on this issue. If this act were to eventually become law, I believe it would put the American taxpayer squarely in the crosshairs of bailouts to banks that gamble and lose on these transactions.

To put it very frankly, that vote in the House was a slap in the face of every constituent of those “aye” voters.

To fully appreciate the gravity of the situation, I recently read that the dollar-value amount of these derivatives being bought and sold on a daily basis amounts to roughly $708 trillion dollars. That makes our federal deficit of $17.5 trillion seem like peanuts!

Are you listening, Mr. Taxpayer?

ROBERT G. HALL

Jacksonville

Should not be exempt

Why should the Catholic Church be exempt from providing its employees health insurance that covers all the same things every other employer’s health insurance covers? Many of their employees are not Catholic and do not share their values.

By the logic put forth in a recent column by Paul Greenberg, it would seem the Catholic Church should not be forced to pay cash to their employees since those employees may use that cash to buy birth control or have an abortion or do other things the church would find evil.

Indeed, to take this argument to its logical conclusion, the church should only be made to provide its employees with groceries, rent checks and other church-approved expenditures.

But wait, that would be a downright anti-American infringement on the rights and freedom of their employees.

Let’s face it: The way your employees use their cash is their business, just as the way they use their health insurance is their business. I believe this reality is not an infringement on freedom of religion.

Furthermore, making birth control and abortion unaffordable for the poor, while leaving them as economically viable options for the well-to do, is morally reprehensible in my book.

KATHY CURTIN

Fayetteville