St. Louis' generosity helped more than 13,000 people

"Times are hard, but we had a nice Christmas thanks to your funding." "It's a great comfort to know there are truly good people who are doing what they can to help those experiencing hard times."

These are the types sentiments written in thank-you notes 100 Neediest Cases received at year's end. And, it's because of your generosity that 100 Neediest Cases helped more than 13,000 people have a brighter holiday.

Your donations totaled nearly $1.3 million, and more than 1,100 cases were adopted for the 2011 holiday season. Each and every case, not just the 100 highlighted in the Post-Dispatch, received a part of that $1.3 million. Many families were able to have a holiday meal they otherwise would not have been able to afford, while others were able to keep the electricity on or purchase a coat or medicine. Yes, your $5 or $10 or larger donation truly made a difference with 100 percent of every dollar going to those who needed extra help.

Now it is our turn to say thank you to everyone who donated and who adopted a family through 100 Neediest Cases. Your generosity extends beyond the season well into the new year.

Vanessa Wayne • St. Louis

Director, United Way of Greater St. Louis, 100 Neediest Cases

Don't ever get old

Regarding "Park sells a few residents" (Feb. 2): I think it is horrible and incredibly inhumane that the St. Louis County Parks Department sold off the cows Emma, Josie, Bambie, Betty and Chase because they were "past the age of reproduction" and "crotchety."

These poor animals should have been allowed to live out the rest of their years in Suson Park, which had been their home. Park officials should not be in these job positions if they have little regard for the animals they are supposed to be caring for.

God forbid anyone get old!

Cheryl Morris • St. Louis

No need for Komen

Planned Parenthood does not actually need funds from Susan G. Komen for the Cure ("Contradictory mission," Feb 2). Planned Parenthood's 2010 Form 990 shows total compensation to Cecile Richards as $353,819, placing her in the wealthiest 1 percent. The chief operating officer, chief financial officer and five vice presidents made more than $240,000 each. LifeSite News reports 22 local Planned Parenthood CEOs earned more than $200,000.

Planned Parenthood could reallocate 11 percent of these compensation packages to cancer screening and — viola! — no need for Komen funds. I am sure Planned Parenthood's leadership would be willing to make that contribution, given its expressed focus on breast cancer.

Further, Planned Parenthood received a temporary spike in donations in reaction to the Komen decision, and has appropriately announced that these funds will go to breast health programs.  It should be held tightly to that promise; using those funds for any other purpose would be exploiting cancer for ideological ends.

Komen has a noble mission. Unfortunately, it has partnered with an entity that has eliminated countless future women, taxpayers, donors and even medical researchers.

Bryan Kirchoff • St. Louis

Victim of political pressure

Regarding "Komen finds itself in mix of controversy" (Feb. 3): I think people missed the very essence of Susan G. Komen for the Cure's initial decision. The Komen foundation made a business decision to move funding away from an organization that does not provide mammograms. Komen was going to drop $680,000 grant money to Planned Parenthood "... because the groups' clinics don't own or operate mammography equipment."

Planned Parenthood provides physical breast exams as a part of wellness exams, but it does not provide mammograms. It provides only referrals.

People heard "Planned Parenthood" and made it a pro-life vs. pro-choice issue. Komen fell prey to uninformed, emotional and political pressure to reestablish funding when it could have put those funds to better use providing low-cost or free mammograms to low-income women.

Joan Burnes • St. Louis

An unconstitutional plan

Regarding "Plan seeks to fill Catholic schools" (Feb. 3): I have no problem with St. Louis Archbishop Robert Carlson's plan to make Catholic schools more Catholic by requiring more Mass, more prayer and more catechism, and I suppose that 72-year-old Rev. William Rowe will find something else to do after being booted from his pulpit in Mount Carmel, Ill., for deviating from the prescribed words of the Catholic Missal ("Ad-libbing his prayers costs priest his job," Feb. 3). What I object to is the part of Archbishop Carlson's plan that involves lobbying the Legislature to enact laws repealing the Missouri constitutional provision that precludes public subsidy of religious organizations.

Section 6 of the Missouri Constitution reads: "... no person can be compelled to erect, support or attend any place or system of worship, or to maintain or support any priest, minister, preacher or teacher of any sect, church, creed or denomination of religion." Even if we could afford to give state money to private schools, it wouldn't be a good idea.

Furthermore, any attempt to do so would cost millions of state dollars trying to litigate its constitutionality.

Hal Harris • Creve Coeur

Missing priorities

"Ad-libbing his prayers costs priest his job" (Feb. 3) told about a priest who lost his job because he didn't follow the prayers exactly when saying Mass. How many times have priests been hidden, transferred and kept on even thought there was clear knowledge of child molestation?

Something is missing in the priorities of the Catholic Church.

Charles J. DeClue • De Soto

In the comfort zone

I appreciate and look forward to Colleen Carroll Campbell's writings. She always keeps me on my toes and inspires thoughtful discussions with those in my life. However, her last column, "The perils of postmodern girlhood" (Feb. 2) has wondering how much more challenging it is to raise boys in this atmosphere she describes. She can argue against other writers and criticize feminism, which is warranted in a free society. But how could she overlook what parents experience in raising boys and men to be against the 'social evils" she so freely sees for her own daughters?

Knowledge is key, and society as a whole works to keep sexual education from reach in these perilous times. Education is the answer, but that seems to be absent from her arguments of how women and girls are victims.

What about the parents raising boys? What about the challenges they face? How much are girls empowered by the knowledge of their bodies and sexuality?

That could be dangerous for Ms. Campbell; she might have to reassess her comfort zone.

Alice Miller • St. Louis