Thomas Lessman




History Maps






Free Guestbook from



Thomas A. Lessman
Published Letters To The Editor


  This page contains the most complete list of Letters to the Editor written by Thomas Lessman and published in various newspapers and magazines.


  Unfortunately some letters are missing because I wasn't able to get a copy in time.  If you know of any other letters, please email me at with the article including source info and URL.



Short list of Letters (By date published)
Click on each title to read the actual letter.


  1) It Involves Three (Re: Abortion), Published on 12-03-2003


  2) NO Deadbeat (Re: Deadbeats not the norm), Published on 2-28-2004


  3) Real Marriage Protection (Re: Marriage Amendment), Published 11-19-2004


  4) Beyond Irresponsible (Re: Retention of Judges), Published on 6-02-2004


  5) Libertarians Against Consolidation, Published on 12-09-2005


  6) Put Families First, Published on 4-12-2006

  7) They Are Patriots (Re: The Minutemen), Published 9-19-2006






1) It Involves Three (Re: Abortion)
  Published in the Topeka Capital-Journal,     Date:  12-03-2003
  Source URL:


Regarding the letter from Megan Mosack, "Hot Flash for Feminists":


The author says that feminists have become so selfish that they have forgotten abortion is a two person issue. I applaud Ms. Mosack's willingness to stand up against the entitlement politics of feminism. Unfortunately, the argument she uses to attack feminist selfishness is tragically wrong.


Abortion is NOT a two person issue. It is a THREE person issue involving women, children and MEN. Feminists became so selfish, and America became so apathetic, that the effect of abortion on men has been ignored.


Dads are expected to turn their feelings off or on depending on the mothers' mood. If she wants the baby, he's expected to be happy. If she wants to abort the baby, he's supposed to turn off his emotions and support her decision. Then he's expected to turn them back on when the mother changes her mind yet again. We don't expect a woman to turn off her emotions, so why do we expect it of men?


The effects of this emotional trauma on a dad are never considered, and fathers are not allowed to mourn for their murdered unborn children. How many billboards in Topeka depict fathers as chickens? At least five at last count.


It takes a man and a woman to make a child. It takes a mother and a father to raise a child. Why do we allow only women to make a decision that affects children and fathers too?


THOMAS LESSMAN President of American Coalition of Families and Children/Kansas Chapter Topeka


2) NO Deadbeat (Re: Deadbeats not the norm)
  Published in the Topeka Capital-Journal,     Date:  2-28-2004
  Source URL:


On behalf of fathers and struggling single parents, we of the American Coalition of Families and Children, Kansas Chapter (ACFC-KS), wish to sincerely thank the Topeka Capital-Journal for the article titled "Deadbeats not the norm."


All too many people have a stereotypical image of "deadbeats" all over the place, and many people are so entrenched in this attitude they can't see past their own ignorance.


Deadbeat is an ugly word, and calling someone a "deadbeat" is no better than the offensive words often hurled at people because of their race or sexual preference.


The article brought up one significant point we've been trying to say for years. How can we be involved in our children's lives if the children's mother -- or biased court officers -- won't let us be involved?


I was a teenage parent; my first child was born when I was 17 (1995). I finished high school with the help of my mother, who helped me raise my child. We had to fight the child's mother at every step just to be involved. Nevertheless, I paid $125 per month in child support from an after-school job, saw my child a week at a time, and did the best I could to be involved.


There were three single mothers in our school, and they got help from SRS, child support, and special help from the school. What did I get as a single father? No help from SRS, no child support, and the school gave me an after-school job as a janitor to help me pay my child support.


Only an ignorant person would condemn fathers as being "deadbeats" without noticing that fathers don't get even a fraction of the help and assistance single mothers receive.


I hope that the article in TCJ has opened a few eyes.


THOMAS LESSMAN, President of ACFC-KS Topeka


3) Real Marriage Protection (Re: Gay Marriage Amendment)
  Published in the Topeka Metro News,     Date:  11-19-2004
  Source URL:  (must scroll down to find letter)
    See also:


Much speak has been made over "protecting marriage" from various social issues. Mostly this speak has been against "gay marriage," but this completely misses the point.


The few married homosexuals are finding out what millions of heterosexuals already know: By far, the most serious enemy marriages face is Unilateral No-Fault Divorce.


Marriage is essentially a contract between two people (traditionally: one woman and one man) who are committing themselves to each other to raise a family. Regardless of whomever is allowed to marry whom (or what), the commitment is worthless whenever either partner can terminate the contract at any time for any reason, over the objections of the other partner.


The federal government has already spent millions of dollars to "promote marriage." A decade ago, while complaining about the rising cost of welfare, the federal government tried to fix the problem by throwing the cost of welfare on single fathers. In both cases, the government only created more problems while continuing to promote unilateral no-fault divorce.


Any constitutional amendment against gay marriage would in fact be unconstitutional. The Constitution was designed to limit government authority, not place limits on the people. Just like Prohibition, this amendment would be used against the people, and would only create more problems (i.e. divorces) for the government to "solve."


For the record, I am against gay/lesbian marriage. I honestly care less what consenting adults do in their spare time. However, if we expand the definition of marriage to include gays and lesbians, we would have to further expand marriage to include polygamy, beastiality, and other forms of "marriage." After all, would it then be fair to discriminate against people because they are not homosexual?


If we truly wish to protect marriage, we must pull our heads out of the sand and eliminate the unilateral no-fault divorce laws that have made marriage dangerous for families and profitable for the attorneys and marriage counselors who make up the "divorce industry."


Thomas Lessman
President, ACFC-KS


4) Beyond Irresponsible (Re: Retention of Judges)
  Published in the Topeka Capital-Journal,     Date:  06-01-2005
  Source URL:


Dave McIntire, responding to Jerry Loney's letter, says that blanket non-retention of judges is irresponsible voting and bad civics. I disagree.


The imposing authority of family courts hits both mothers and fathers hard. Two parents enter, one parent and one visitor leave. Usually it is the father, but many mothers are also segregated into visitor status. Regardless of who thinks he or she has won, the result is that the family is broken, the children have one less parent, America becomes that much weaker and "the system" becomes that much richer.


Attorneys, psychiatrists, mediators and a host of other professions have created a multibillion dollar divorce industry on the broken backs of families. Judges are entrusted to maintain justice, but more often than not they abuse their authority to enrich their friends and supporters.


There is one reason I disagree with Jerry Loney, because I know of one judge in Shawnee County who is fit and just. However, they do not even honor her with the title of judge; she's an administrative hearing officer. I guess there is more than one way to marginalize justice.


As for irresponsible voting, most voters blindly vote to retain (keep) all judges because they have no clue as to how corrupt and broken the system is. That is irresponsible voting.


When judges violate the rules of ethics, accept bribes and hook up their professional golf buddies by abusing their authority, it is time to remove them. When Enron crashed, everyone looked straight at the CEO and other leaders. It makes no difference if the thug wears a business suit, a ski mask or a black robe -- a thug is a thug and deserves to be in prison.


THOMAS LESSMAN, Kansas president, American Coalition of Families and Citizens


5) Libertarians Against Consolidation
  Published in the Topeka Metro News,     Date:  12-09-2005
  Source URL:  (Published in print version only, not on the Topeka Metro website)
     See Also:


Dear Editor:


     The Kansas Libertarian Party strongly opposes the attempt to consolidate the governments of Topeka and Shawnee County.  Smaller, more representative government is always more preferable to more powerful governments that are disassociated from the people they serve.


     There are several reasons for responsible citizens to oppose the consolidation plan.  By far, the two most important are:

     1.   Voters will lose more representation, ending up with fewer elected officials and more appointed officials.

     2.   Consolidation means more power in fewer hands, and eliminates the system of checks and balances between city and county governments.


     In recent years, America has been rapidly losing hard-won freedoms.  Letís not contribute to this trend.  Taking away representation and consolidating power in fewer hands is a recipe for disaster.  If you want a more powerful and less accountable government, consolidation may be for you.  However, if you cherish freedom and liberty, you should oppose consolidation.


     The Libertarian Party of Kansas urges you to protect your rights and Vote NO!


Signed:  The Libertarian Party of Kansas, including:

  Rob Hodgkinson, LPKS Chair,

  Thomas Lessman,

  Sharon DuBois,

  Patrick Wilbur,

  And other members.


6) Put Families First

  Published in the Topeka Capital-Journal,     Date:  04-15-2006

  Source URL:


Letter that was sent:

Put Families First


Amy White's letter "Put Children First" (4-04-06) is so off the mark it demands a rebuttle.  Obviously she has no idea what it's like being a segregated non-custodial parent.


The vast majority of parents who DON'T pay child support CAN'T PAY.  It's not about "refusing" to pay - they simply can't pay $500, $1000, or $2000 every month due to layoffs, illness, or disability.  Often child support amounts to 50% or more of a parent's income, and leaves them unable to feed the children when they are with them.


Does Ms. White really think custodial parents will get ANY child support if the other parent loses their driver's license or gets thrown in jail because they can't pay?  She doesn't say.  Instead, her letter smacks of revenge and harsher penalties.


I've got news for Ms. White.  It's not about demanding revenge or "getting all the child support you can get" from the other parent.  Raising children is about mom and dad working together to raise the children.  If you can't support your own children, or at least work with their father to raise them, then perhaps you aren't fit to be a parent.



Thomas Lessman,

President of the American Coalition of Families & Citizens - Kansas Chapter

Letter that was published:

Put families first


Amy White's letter "Put Children First" is so off the mark it demands a rebuttal. Obviously she has no idea what it's like being a segregated non-custodial parent.


It's not about refusing to pay child support, they simply can't pay $500, $1,000, or $2,000 every month due to layoffs, illness, or disability. Often child support amounts to 50 percent or more of a parent's income, and leaves them unable to feed the children when they are with them.


Does Ms. White really think custodial parents will get any child support if the other parent loses their driver's license or gets thrown in jail because they can't pay? She doesn't say. Instead, her letter smacks of revenge and harsher penalties.


Raising children is about mom and dad working together to raise the children.


THOMAS LESSMAN, president, American Coalition of Families & Citizens, Kansas Chapter



7) They Are Patriots

  Published in the Topeka Capital-Journal,     Date:  09-19-2006

  Source URL


In light of the editorial Sept. 13, I feel it necessary to speak in defense of the Minutemen. Maybe the editorial board - like many entrenched politicians - just doesn't get it.


Illegal aliens have no respect for our laws, nor do they care about the rights or freedom of American citizens. Some factions of illegal aliens advocate the subversion and outright conquest of several U.S. states. More than 20 million illegal aliens have already infiltrated our nation. That's a serious threat to our national security, and the government's response to date has been dangerously weak.


In times of crisis, every American citizens has the duty to stand up and work together to end the crisis. The Minutemen stood together to fight for our independence and freedom in 1775. Today they are standing up again to defend America's independence and freedom. Instead of criticizing these patriots, we should be supporting their brave efforts.




What Political

Philosophy do

you follow?


Take the

World's Smallest

Political Quiz

to find out!




| Homepage | Information | Resume | Issues | News & Updates | Resources | Links |
| Talessman's Atlas of World History  |  Talessman's Blog  |  Lessman Farm  |

* Website and content are Copyright Thomas Lessman, 2004 to Present