Overly critical of pregnancy resource centers

Re: “Colorado will protect pregnant women,” April 16 editorial

Gov. Jared Polis and Democratic state legislators squandered a chance to demonstrate that they are truly in favor of choice and not simply pro-abortion.

Some women immediately believe they have made a horrible mistake after taking the first pill in the two-pill medication abortion regimen. Until Senate Bill 23-190 was signed into law, they were able to access the abortion pill reversal regimen that utilizes natural progesterone to mitigate the abortifacient effects of mifepristone. This doubled their chances of having a continuing pregnancy based on robust, multifaceted evidence accumulated over the past 17 years.

Now women in Colorado are effectively told that they can’t withdraw their consent from the medication abortion procedure. SB 190 cruelly gives them only two options – to finish their abortion and kill their wanted baby or omit the second abortion pill, misoprostol, and face the prospect of serious complications with only a 25% chance of saving their child.

Colorado women and their families deserve more from their government. Government should honor all their choices and protect their right to continue their pregnancy as originally promised by the 2022 Reproductive Health Equity Act.

Thomas J. Perille, Englewood

One of the “critical abortion protections” signed into law is SB 190, which unfairly targets pregnancy resource centers, branding them as deceptive.

PRC representatives from as far away as Nebraska and Delta were at the Senate the day this bill was to be debated, ready to discuss with lawmakers what they offer women in the way of an alternative to abortion. They had literature from their centers listing what they offer in plain, uncomplicated terms.

Very few legislators made a visit to the tables, and the Senate leadership opted to discuss the bill late in the evening after most advocates had returned home when the discussion would be at its lowest.

Is this taking an honest look at the legislation? Democrats are in the majority but could have had the courtesy and statesmanship to openly discuss a bill that is affecting a large number of conscientious, hard-working, and principled people who look to give women another choice. One has the uncomfortable thought of unpopular legislation recently treated in the Tennessee State House.

Yes, a woman doesn’t want to come all the way from Texas for an abortion and be offered diapers. However, a phone call could clarify in minutes whether a pregnancy center provides abortion. This is something most women should be able to handle.

SB 190 was mean-spirited and, as Krista Kafer suggests in her April 9 commentary, likely unconstitutional. In any case, it was overkill.

Frances Rossi, Denver

Halliburton works to keep it clean

Re: “The Halliburton Loophole,” April 16 commentary

The article was factual as far as it went, but the authors left out three critical pieces of information:

First, there is a “seal” that keeps surface water separate from those expensive chemicals. True, those chemicals would harm drinking water if they rose two miles to the surface, but Halliburton could not afford to stay in business if water seeped down to contaminate the oil or gas in the well.

Second, they haul some of those chemicals to be recycled for use in the next well.

Third, just like Coca-Cola won’t share its recipe, Halliburton rightfully won’t share their formula with competitors.

Raymond Ross, Montrose

Kafer makes the facts fashionable again

Re: “Peters’ ankle monitor is the GOP’s new look,” April 16 commentary

I rarely agree with Krista Kafer. But in her column she details the full run of events in the Tina Peters scandal. I enjoyed her suggestion that Peters should “consider starting her own prison chic boutique” for other members of the GOP who may soon follow her into the ankle bracelet and home confinement club (or better yet, jail).

Kafer has a loyal following of conservative readers who, I suspect, have not paid close attention to the travails of Peters. So I very much appreciate her listing all of Peters’ activities to undermine the 2020 election for those readers to see it all in black and white finally. Just the facts. The only thing that is going to wake up the misinformed is one of their own telling them the truth. Please continue to do so, Ms. Kafer.

Now, if we could only hold Ms. Peters financially liable for all the money she has cost Colorado taxpayers.

Krista Igoe, Littleton

As of now, we are still using fossil fuels to make our clean electricity

Re: “Plugging in has become a key climate solution, but there are some obstacles,” April 16 news story

An article in Sunday’s paper touts the use of electricity to heat our homes and power our cars and our many other daily needs. Electricity is more environmentally friendly than fossil fuels, I agree. However, there is not a word in the article about the fact that most of our electric power is produced with fossil fuels that produce carbon dioxide emissions: 41% Natural Gas, 19% Coal. (Wash Post, “America needs clean electricity.
These states show how to do it,” Apr. 12.)

Options to reduce those numbers include hydropower, nuclear, wind and solar.

It’s fine to replace your gas stove with an electric stove or buy an electric vehicle (I have one), but before you boast about doing so, check what fuel is used to produce your electricity.

Tom Roberts, Denver

Colorado legislators kill weapons bill in committee

Re: “Colorado assault weapons ban killed in late-night vote by House committee,” April 20 online news story

As a public school teacher working in Jeffco on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings, I have to say just how truly disappointing it is to see three Democrats in the state House help to torpedo the assault weapons ban bill in committee even after major compromises were made to it.

Rep. Bob Marshall’s website indicates that he has sponsored a bill to help teachers like me save money on our state income taxes, but when it comes to taking away the means for mass shooters to harm my students and me, he is unwilling to help. I am a proud gun owner, but assault weapons are weapons of war designed for one thing and for one thing only – killing as many people as quickly as possible.

It is truly sad that we have individuals like Rep. Lauren Boebert and others who view the Second Amendment as an absolute right and view any attempt to regulate firearms in America as an affront to their freedoms, while at the same time, they are willing to remove books from our school libraries, prevent teachers from teaching certain topics to our students, and deny the rights for transgender youths to seek gender-affirming health care. The hypocrisy of these elected officials is palpable and provides a great disservice to public policy and society.

Andrew Harrison, Denver