Funds for Sterilization

* Re “Pay People Not to Have Kids,” Voices, Nov. 6: As a Roman Catholic, I object to Robert Lanz’s recommendation that a portion of my tax money be used to pay people not to have kids, and/or for sterilization at government expense.

It’s not “government’s” money--it is our money, and to those of us who hold the religious belief that conception is a gift from God that should not be interfered with by man, his recommendation is offensive and would force us to participate in contributing to someone else’s sin.

Also, “voluntary” sterilization is only one step away from “mandatory” sterilization and government-regulated family planning. I’ll stop paying taxes before I allow any of my hard-earned money to support this program.

DENISE GONZALEZ

San Gabriel

* I wonder if I’m the only one to notice that Lanz seems to think that the “people” he wants to pay for not having children can only have their “tubes” tied. What about the other 50% of those people who can have vasectomies? How sad that our society still puts the burden for unwanted children on women. It’s about time that society recognize that the men must also take their fair share of responsibility!

I understand that the vasectomy procedure can be reversed too (well, “in most cases,” that is). Perhaps the other 50% of the population (males) left out of Lanz’s equation would like an opportunity to “pull themselves out of poverty.”

MARY DeGEORGE

Los Angeles