Letters To The Editor

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

Mendoza influence just distraction

I am appalled that your lead story of June 15 attempted to seek pity for Mona Mendoza.

It’s preposterous to change words like “baseman” to “baseperson.” People using these words mean no insult to women. They are terms we use metaphorically. To take offense implies hypersensitivity.

Mendoza’s agenda deepens as a “race proclaimer.” People should be proud of their heritage, but using heritage for sympathy and unfair advantage is another matter. Racial problems are caused by groups separating themselves.

America is the world’s melting pot, but some refuse to melt or allow others to be melted in. Interracial offspring may indeed resolve this polarization of bigotry on both sides.

Furthermore, those who believe homosexuality is as wrong as lying are labeled as intolerant. Trying to change the perspective of homosexuality is as ridiculous as trying to change the perspective of child molestation. Both harm children and pull them off the intended track. It just depends on your own moral compass. I follow God’s example of hate the sin, love the sinner - which is every one of us.

Our schools are spending too much time on socialism and humanism and too little on real education. Parents must teach morality. If you demand to kick God out of our schools, then I demand that you kick Satan out as well.

If you think that makes me intolerant, then take a long look in the mirror.

Spokane rejected Mendoza’s agenda. Now, can we get back to the basics in our schools? Timothy L. Dalley Spokane

Diversity efforts worthless

I read with interest the article regarding Mona Mendoza’s desire for a more diverse city.

Having traveled several times to Yugoslavia and having observed firsthand the diversity they accomplished there makes me wonder why we spend so much time, money and attention on the subject here.

I do not believe you can legislate the desired result. And the more attention that is drawn to the issue the more division occurs.

Have all the billions that have been spent by various governmental agencies achieved the desired results? I don’t think so. In fact, it appears just the opposite has occurred. Will we never learn? Paul G. Tinning Spokane

Mascot names honor qualities

When was the last time a team mascot was a bluebird, an angle worm or a degenerate-type person? Teams choose a mascot that represents qualities of strength, intelligence, and other positive ingredients, not something that downgrades them.

The Indian brave, as a part of our history, was strong, smart, swift and cunning. Because of these characteristics he was a feared warrior, a wilderness survivor and a great hunter and horseman. All those things command our respect.

Why would we not want a mascot that exemplifies these qualities? To name a team Braves, Redskins, Indians or Blackhawks is a gesture of total respect and honor. How can this be offensive in any way?

It’s the ‘90s and we’re all focused on our rights, but I have a feeling that if there were no teams with Indian names, we might be under the gun for racial discrimination. Can’t anything be done nowadays without being the target of some group?

Please accept the honor of representing our teams as a token of our respect. Why do you make us feel guilty for respecting our history and our heritage? Wayne E. Terry Spokane

THE ENVIRONMENT

Grizzly outlook for too many places

Many of us who consider ourselves pro-environment do not want the grizzly bear put into Eastern Washington and Idaho wilderness areas. The reason is simple: We are afraid to hike in wilderness areas with grizzly bears.

There are many grizzly bears in Alaska and Canada. I have watched with increasing concern the efforts to put grizzly bears into Eastern Washington and now Idaho wildernesses.

Please do not be fooled. When you are surveyed, realize that surveys can be worded in a biased manner.

Grizzly bears are dangerous. If you encounter one, you cannot escape. You can only hope the bear is not in the mood to attack you.

Take time to read the warnings given to you before you hike in Canadian wilderness areas. Ask the people who live just outside Salmo-Priest Wilderness Area in Eastern Washington how they feel about the grizzly bears put into that wilderness.

We do not go to Salmo-Priest any more. Now, we read that the beautiful Selway-Bitterroot area may be given to the grizzly.

I understand the arguments, but am heartsick about this. If you hike, backpack, hunt or respect the right of others to do so, please work against more wilderness areas with grizzly bears. If you are working toward putting the bears into a particular area, is this an area in which you personally hike? Tamara D. Weaver Spokane

We must protect world we live in

We, as civilized, technologically advanced people, are responsible for the rapidly increasing depletion of world resources and degradation of the environment. Our nation, along with other industrialized countries, makes up only 20 percent of the Earth’s population. Yet these countries together consume nearly 80 percent of all man-used resources.

Daily, vast amounts of energy and resources are spent and a corresponding degree of environmental damage is done solely for our convenience and comfort. Yearly, each of us is responsible for the release of thousands of pounds of harmful carbon compounds and toxic chemicals into our vital air, protective atmosphere and into the soil, water and oceans that feed us.

Each gallon of fuel, pound of coal or cubic foot of natural gas burned releases at least two-thirds of its weight in harmful carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and compounds of nitrogen and sulfur into our environment. Industry, including agriculture, uses thousands of synthetic chemical compounds, many highly toxic, to produce things we buy.

Big business arrogance and government and public complacency of are astounding and frightening.

Recycling is a start but only a modest one.

In the search for a solution, we all could start by asking ourselves each morning, “How can I fulfill my obligations today and still do the least amount of damage to the world around me?”

We could try living our lives more in accordance with our basic needs than our wasteful and extravagant wants. John L. Noyes, M.D. Kalispell, Mont.

TECHNOLOGY

Innovators, look to universities, too

I congratulate the four girls from Sacajawea Middle School on their achievements (“8th graders win science competition,” Region, June 8).

Erin Richardson, Lindsey Watts, Eli Penberthy and Klara Bowman, good job. It is always nice to see your hard work pay off and you have achieved a lot. Yet, your work is far from done.

I’ve spent the last years at the University of Idaho finishing up a degree in chemical engineering. A fair amount of that time has been related to working with the pulping of wheat straw and what is involved on the technical side of that issue. That work, among other things, has been directed to identify the limitations we face in the Pacific Northwest right now.

I hope that the focus of their forum won’t weighted too heavily to getting the straw to the mill. Because without the technology to economically convert it to pulp, it would be a wasted effort.

In his June 8 editorial (“Four examples of what is right”), Opinion editor John Webster’s stated, “It’s time for experts from business and government to get involved,” which is true. But that shouldn’t be the final guest list. If we leave out the people in industry and the local universities who are currently working on this issue and who are well aware what is involved and what it will take, we will be leaving out the most important part.

Erin, Lindsey, Eli, and Kara, think wisely before you send out that invitation list. Let’s make sure that the “experts in business and government” don’t make any decisions that current technology can’t back up. Aaron C. Mosher, chemical engineer Moscow, Idaho

IN THE PAPER

Concert review ‘appalling’

Could staff writer Winda Benedetti find any more back-handed negatives to throw at superb sax man Kenny G, in her appalling concert preview (June 5) and review (June 11)?

Phrases such as “overhyped background pablum,” “darn whiny,” “even he can kick up the heat,” “thin and forgettable on stereo,” “dull man and his sax” and “surprisingly energetic” made me see red.

Benedetti’s lack of professionalism is glaringly obvious in her thinly veiled attacks on this charming, unassuming, purely talented gentleman. “Maybe he realizes the sax gets a tad tedious … (he) wisely knew when to step aside …”

Ah yes, thousands of us paid $35 a seat for tedium - something we could’ve obtained watching an evening of lackluster reruns on TV, for free! That’s why we brought him back for nearly a half-hour of encores. If Benedetti doesn’t care for his music stylings, fine. Responsible journalism nevertheless calls for fair recognition of talent. My escort and I (barely out of my 20s; not quite “middle age,” as she portrayed the audience) were less impressed by the near-heavy metal guitar solo break as she was, but acknowledge the performer’s talent and charisma.

Kenny G kindly complimented our city and our state. In return, “we,” courtesy of Benedetti, deliver a stinging slap across his face. Spokane was lucky to have this firstrate performer who flawlessly rendered a breathtakingly beautiful concert. However, with reviews such as Benedetti’s, who could blame big-name performers for crossing Spokane off their tour stops? Lisa C. Buell Spangle, Wash.