Letters: Does Indiana's attorney general understand the argument?

I recently read Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita's Viewpoint on the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court. While I respect his view, I think the fact that the Supreme Court overturned this decision that was made by its predecessors based on religious viewpoints is a dangerous precipice to teeter on.I would also like to point out that his argument is incorrect based on what the actual counterargument is. Rokita stated that some states will continue to be "pro-abortion." This isn't and has never been the argument. The counterargument is "pro-choice." Those are incredibly different arguments. Pro-choice means you just want people to be able to have the right to choose. If you are against abortion, then don't have one. But your beliefs should not dictate another American woman's health care. If someone wants to join in on the argument, then they should at a minimum understand what the actual argument is.

Lauren TomasbiOsceola

Golden Rule

Since the historic Supreme Court decision in June overturning Roe v. Wade, much news coverage has featured the views and experiences of women who have had abortions. What should also be emphasized is that an abortion destroys the life of a developing human being. If we, as a society, still believe in the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would have done unto you," then we should realize that we, too, were once that small being inside of our mothers. Are we grateful to have had the chance to live in this world and enjoy the benefits of day-to-today living? Doesn't everyone deserve that opportunity?

Following the Golden Rule then, we in Indiana should support the recent Supreme Court decision, work for the protection of all unborn life, and adequately support women in crisis pregnancies.

Karen Kazmierzak

South Bend

Common sense

Recently I noticed that the ID policy for purchasing alcohol seems to have changed at our local supermarkets. I understand Indiana law requires ID for anyone under the age of 40. I am in my mid-70's, have white hair, and definitely look my age. I have not been asked for my ID in decades. However, when I purchased some alcohol at Meijer recently, not only did the clerk ask for my driver's license, but she also scanned both sides into their system. This means my personal information including full name, address, date of birth and ID number are now stored in Meijer computers. Martin's has the same policy.

With the epidemic of identity theft these days, I am very concerned about this new policy. What is the justification for requiring ID of a customer who is clearly over 40? This makes no sense, violates my privacy, and puts me at risk for identity theft. Whatever happened to common sense?

Sara Goepfrich

Mishawaka

This article originally appeared on South Bend Tribune: Todd Rokita, Indiana AG, misstated abortion argument in recent column.