Letters to the editor Dec. 20

Community colleges need to have certain characteristics

I contend that academia is using a prejudiced standard when decrying the supposed failure of community colleges. I would like to argue the view of the working man toward education.

Academia insists that we sup at a sit-down restaurant. Haute cuisine is the preferred fare. The menu stresses complete dinners with some ala carte or side dishes.

I was born in the 1940s, and have the attitude of the folks that lived then. We graduated from high schools, went into a military service, went to a trade school, married and worked until retirement.

I'm a working stiff. I like the freedom of the cafeteria, the McDonald's or the burrito wagon. It suits my style of living.

The community college was designed for us. Most of us never intended to acquire any degree, not even an associate's. Academia calls us a failure, but they are wrong. We wanted our training ala carte, just a snack.

These are some of the characteristics I suggest for community colleges. They must be scattered amidst the communities so people can easily drive to them. They must be economical. The student should be able to gain an associate's degree that is fully transferable to the university system. The curriculum needs to stress vocational training as well. Rural areas need computer based courses. Unions and industries need to be involved. Smaller may not be better, but it may be necessary.

Frank Paluch

Carson City

Keep personhood initiative off the ballot

Roe v. Wade was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973, and in 1990, Nevada voters seconded this decision by passing an initiative to amend the Nevada Constitution to guarantee every Nevada woman the right to determine her reproductive future.

Now, outside elements are attempting to place a personhood initiative on the November ballot, which seeks to undo that work and strip away Nevadans' right to make this very private choice.

Under the personhood initiative, fertilized eggs would be given the same legal protections as a born child. It would result in the banning of commonly used forms of birth control including the morning-after pill, as well as in-vitro fertilization, medical care for ectopic pregnancies and abortions in all circumstances, even if a woman's life is in danger.

Roe v. Wade is often viewed as the landmark case for legalization of abortion, but it means so much more than that. Roe v. Wade is about protecting Americans from government and religious intrusions in their personal lives.

The personhood initiative has gone down to defeat in other states because those states' voters rightly determined that choosing when and how to enter into parenthood is a very personal and private matter, and neither government nor anyone else should have the right to interject themselves into this decision.

I encourage all Nevadans who are passionate about protecting our right to make private medical choices to speak up against the personhood initiative.

Carissa Snedeker

Silver Springs