Essential choice for planet

The USA, and indeed, the planet, is at a crossroads. The choices we make now on climate change will influence our world as we know it. Climate change “Naysayers” are playing with fire, they are ignoring factual indicators that global warming exists, is constant and will, as early as 2050, bring upon us all, whatever our opinions on abortion, immigration, clean water or income inequality, unimaginable chaos as the seas rise, toxic contaminates spread, and cities, indeed whole countries, disappear under water. Ignoring key scientific facts today will lead to catastrophic disruption, agony and global chaos within decades. If we do not act now, we will be acted upon by nature, it is just that simple. The necessary choice is to rejoin 2015 Paris Agreement with its 195 nation/state signatories. (An accord President Trump almost willfully withdrew us from.)

In this community of nations, we should spearhead efforts to plan and prepare for meaningful, if challenging changes, in attitudes, behaviors and investments to save our planet for our children and grandchildren. I say we must be aggressive stewards of the amazing world we have been entrusted with. I say. “Choose the future!!” What do you choose?

Wm Clancy Thompson, Wilmington

No good choices

EDITOR: The letter of June 8 titled “Pursuing justice” is consistent with the identity-based progressive movement. The writer and the movement do not leave whites with any good choices: we are either bigoted, ignorant of our racism, or insufficiently “woke." For a more complete picture of how this movement has played out on campus, and promises to change our society, watch Mike Nayna’s three-part documentary on YouTube about the Evergreen Equity Council. Fascinating and terrifying.

For a more balanced view on race and our society you can read Thomas Sowell’s “Discrimination and Disparities”; also read Coleman Hughes’ penetrating essays at Quillette for insight.

I long for a truly colorblind America, where the content of our character matters more than skin pigment, and where we treat each other based one the one true identity we all share: beloved child of God.

John Townson, Hampstead

Ethics of abortion

EDITOR: The basis for abortion rights in the U.S. rests on a decision (Roe vs. Wade) by the Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant women's liberty to chose whether or not to have an abortion.

As a result of medical advances, the Court in 1992 (Planned Parenthood vs. Casey) overruled Roe's trimester framework in favor of a standard based on fetal viability (the ability to live outside the womb which may occur at least 23 or 24 weeks or even earlier).

The Court permitted prohibitions on abortions during the 3rd trimester under the justification of fetal protection and as long as the life of the mother was not at risk. Late term abortion and abortion on demand (3rd trimester) were a non-sequitur.

It should be obvious regardless if you are pro-life or pro-choice that the "right of privacy" of the mother diminishes as the viability of the fetus increases. The viability of that fetus provides that fetus at that point with a voice, albeit a silent voice, which is protected by the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. My opinion is not based on any religious conviction but rather on a sense of ethics and common sense morality.

George Schierle, Kure Beach

Misplaced blame

EDITOR: Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell has once again blamed the Republican party and Trump for all kinds of government problems. For example the measles outbreak is still going because the far right bizarrely told the government to butt out. She fails to tell you that Robert Kennedy Jr. and other Democrats were saying the same thing.

Her next example was Republican attacks on the Federal Reserve, but she forgets Democrats doing the same thing during the Clinton and Obama administrations.

The next example is Trump rolling back some environmental regulations. However some of those regulations create so much red tape that it takes 10 years of study before you can start to build a bridge or other project. Of course this greatly increases the cost for infrastructure improvements.

Carbon output in America is already below 2010 levels and is still going down. This downturn of pollutants was caused by the private sector, not government regulations.

It is time all the Trump haters start working to improve our country instead of being against everything Trump is for. For example over 100,000 illegal aliens are crossing our southern border every month. However Democrats say that is good and we need to be more compassionate forget the cost to taxpayers.

Terry Shew, Wilmington

Make polluters pay

EDITOR: As StarNews has previously reported, for over forty years DuPont and its spinoff, the Chemours Company, have been discharging the residue of such products as Teflon in the form of GenX and other per- and polyfluoroalkyls (PFAS) with their adverse health effects into the Cape Fear River, the drinking water of Wilmington and New Hanover County.

Yet, as your latest front-page article on the subject reports (June 12), it is the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) that has to cough up $46 million to create a filter system against future GenX and PFAS poisoning, a filter system that leaves not only 10 percent of the poison in but adds $60/year to the average water customer’s bill. With a federal lawsuit against the perpetrators up in the air for who knows how long, basically, the victims will be paying for the damage.

CFPUA did not dump GenX and PFAS into our drinking water; DuPont and Chemours did. Why don’t they come up with the millions it might take to build a containment system at their plant to capture 100 percent of GenX and PFAS so that they never enter the Cape Fear River?

Suzy T. Kane, Wilmington