Girard should learn to live with its old high school

EDITOR:
It is time for the Girard Board of Education to face reality. Almost 60 percent of the single family homes in Girard are rentals (and growing). This does not include duplexes and apartment complexes.
Landlords tell them if they vote for a levy, their rent will go up (and that is the God's truth). Most renters move every three to four years, so what does that do to your school system.
A great many of our voters are seniors and 90 percent of those people vote; that's the way they were raised (values). I am a member of this group and proud of it. When is the drain on this group of people going to stop? Sure some people say seniors don't have to pay taxes. Are you kidding? There are many seniors living from hand to mouth. We are living longer, but it is also costing a lot more.
I raised two wonderful children, They attended Girard schools and did well. One attended YSU and has a master's in business, the other also went to YSU and received a doctorate in education. And all this was done in a system that someone now thinks will give a better education if there is a new school. How?
It's about time to say no to the way schools are funded, and to tell them to stop throwing money around like there is no tomorrow.
Most of the homes were built about the same time as the high school. Should they all be torn down? Ninety-five percent are in good condition because they have been taken care of. If you have a leak, fix it. If your furnace doesn't supply heat, fix it. Does every place that people work have a sprinkler system? No. That's why you have fire drills.
This system is getting great reviews by the state and noticed by other systems. So what does a new building do to improve something that is working?
We do not need a new school. Let's all start living and teaching our children to live within our means.
RALPH B. CHUEY
Girard
Supreme Court got it right
EDITOR:
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to uphold a federal law prohibiting partial-birth abortion is a small step toward respecting the dignity of women and their children. Although the decision's impact is narrow from a legal standpoint, for the first time in 34 years the court calls the victim of abortion an unborn child, and recognizes that procured abortion is a form of deliberate killing.
Until April 18, it was legal in the United States to partially deliver a child, insert scissors into the back of the child's skull, then suction out the child's brain to effect an abortion. The court's decision rightly recognizes the barbarity of this act, described by the American Medical Association as never medically necessary.
Women turn to abortion out of fear or desperation. Catholic Charities offices financial and material assistance, as well as adoption services and counseling to anyone in need. If you are suffering after abortion, you are invited to join the thousands who have found healing and peace through "Project Rachel: Post-Abortion Counseling."
MELINDA KNIGHT
DANIEL THIMONS
Office of Pro-Life, Marriage and Family
Catholic Diocese of Youngstown
Bad news for women
EDITOR:
The U.S. Supreme Court has invaded the woman's womb for the first time since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1972. This bodes ill for the future of women's health. The Bush-appointed court consistently takes away Americans' rights, rather than standing up for them.
The term "Partial Birth Abortion" is a deliberate misnomer, which was selected by the far right wing as their buzzword to frighten and push public opinion toward their political ends. It worked.
This procedure is not intended, and is very seldom used, to terminate a pregnancy for personal or convenience reasons. It is used when a pregnancy results in severe complications which could endanger a mother's life or health.
Wake up, American women. The Supreme Court could care less whether you live or die.
JUDY A. GUY
Boardman