COLBY, Kan. - The debate over proper function of civil authority in matters of personal choice is being obfuscated intentionally by fundamental conservatives who are successfully making it a religious battle by declaring Christianity as our national religion. We don't need a couple stubborn old men using your platform to argue our differences. Water rights and human reproduction rights have very little in common with each other. They may both have moral and ethical issues that are related, but arguing them in the same debate session will benefit neither one.
Public education and health care are both very important areas to be considered in the debate over Pro Life and Pro Choice issues. Religion should not hold either of these issues hostage. They are biological and physical regardless of religious orientation.
Making this a religious battle is exactly what the authors of our constitution intended to avoid by declaring religious rules would be left in the domain of religious institutions and civil rules and laws would be settled by debate that was not dependent or defended solely on any particular religious group's theology. And religious groups would not have to consult civil authorities to get approval or permission to set their own policies concerning theological questions or standards. Civil government has no say concerning who religious organizations accept and who they don't accept for membership. In the same token, religious organizations cannot require civil government to enforce their canon. Nor should civil government deny government services to anyone on the basis of their religion or lack thereof.
[Vickie, I apologize for carrying my disagreement with another writer over the appropriation of water in Kansas into the comment section of your post concerning women's freedom of choice and control over the use of their bodies.]