In the January 30, 2006 edition of ET, there was an article that set off my angry button.
It was about trees (“Now starring George Bush as Paul Bunyan,” Jan. 30).
I understand that we have the responsibility to protect our national forests. I mean I don’t want Woody Woodpecker to not have a home – he was my favorite bird growing up.
I understand that the forests of America are part of her beauty. But, what I don’t understand is why conservationists will scream and holler about the life of a tree, but when it comes to a baby in the womb we just say kill it.
Tell what is the justice in that.
I am sure this issue is too controversial so you don’t want to make anyone think you are anti- or pro- abortion, right?
Well that’s because trees take place before the unborn human life.
Please, if you’re going to make a fuss about trees, do the same about the millions of children who have been aborted due to convenience of the mother’s life.
And then while you’re at it, write about the judges who take law into their own hands when it comes to a child in foster care and giving a child back to a drug-addicted father.
Make your writing talents useful and write about the AIDS crisis and what the students of ETSU are doing about.
Leave the trees to be used for what they’re needed for – paper.
Chris Smith

Author