Letters to the Editor

Should immigrants be upset with lack of public language options?

Why are legal immigrants upset?

In response to “Charlotte provides most of its services only in English. The city wants to change that.” (April 8):

Should a legal immigrant who is welcomed to this country be that upset by an imprecise translation of a word or words in a public notice in their language? Kudos to immigrant Dimple Ajmera, who became a U.S. citizen and was elected to public office, but her comment on Astrid Chirinos’s complaint suggests some sympathetic resentment.

Hopefully, that does not outweigh her gratitude for the opportunities the country has always offered her and others.

Phil Clutts, Harrisburg

As an immigrant, I’m disturbed

As an immigrant, it is appalling to me that Astrid Chirinos and others are expecting us to adapt and accommodate their unwillingness and/or laziness to learn English. Furthermore, it is even more disturbing that the city council is considering appeasement of that attitude. After all, it is us taxpayers that will have to pay for all those measures while we still have large sections of the city without street lights.

Maybe it would be more helpful to send immigrants to community colleges on their own time to take some English classes.

Mario Moreno, Charlotte

Public financing? Terrible idea

In response to “Financing, transparency proposed as remedy for ‘dark place’ of money in NC politics” (April 6):

Public financing for N.C. elections is one of the worst ideas I’ve ever heard. It’s yet another sign of government overreach and a waste of taxpayer dollars. In fact, I would go so far as to argue it’s just another form of socialism.

I’d rather prefer my democracy the old-fashioned way where I can just buy my elected official instead of the idea of public financing. Let Freedom Ring (Cha-Ching Cha-Ching.)

Garrett Nelson, Charlotte

Women can think for themselves

In response to “NC can do better on abortion laws” (April 5 Forum):

Crisis pregnancy centers present factual information, along with live ultrasound pictures of the baby in a woman's womb. The problem for abortion supporters is that CPCs offer an alternative to abortions. It takes a great deal of patronizing chutzpah to suggest that women are incapable of making an informed choice when presented with two countervailing options.

For those who take umbrage with the N.C. legislature's $1.3 million of support for crisis pregnancy centers, that seems like chump change when compared to the federal funding from our tax dollars in excess of $1.5 billion within three years for only one of numerous abortion providers, Planned Parenthood!

I too believe that N.C. women and U.S. taxpayers do deserve better, though.

James B. Hall, Charlotte

CPCs help women in many ways

I wonder if Forum writer Laura Reich has even ever been inside a crisis pregnancy center. CPCs offer women hope and help. Doctors and nurses provide free medical care and women can receive free diapers, formula and clothing.

I personally know of women who were overjoyed to see their baby on the free ultrasound provided by CPCs, because the abortion clinic had told them it’s just a clump of cells. It’s just tissue and it’s certainly not a baby. These women saw otherwise on the ultrasound screen. So remind me again who it is telling lies and spreading misinformation?

Lissa Tipple, Charlotte

Congress, focus on the big picture

Any intelligent, logical or fair thinking person that watches the news, including Democrats, knows that there is both a humanitarian crisis for immigrants and a massive system overload for our border patrol people. Democrats’ denial is another political attempt to cast doubt on President Trump, hoping voters will flock to them in 2020.

Congress remains passive when it could help by changing a few laws, but it can’t let President Trump have that win. Voters, take note.

Howard Honeycutt, Charlotte

Name calling doesn’t help win arguments

Keith Wilson
Keith Wilson

As an independent voter, I find the use of labels and name-calling as shortcuts for people who do not have a good argument. When I see or hear terms like "conservative" or "liberal" used like weapons, I tend to discount the message.

When I see "Trump derangement syndrome" I see someone trying to say you are crazy to feel the president is being untruthful or unwise with a particular path. When I see the terms "Nazism" or "apartheid" used to define disagreement with a policy, they better be talking about heinous acts. Facts matter.

Let's civilly discuss the facts to resolve matters. Governance is hard enough, but even more so when people use over-simplified or inappropriate shortcuts.

Keith Wilson, Charlotte