Letters To The Editor
SPOKANE MATTERS
Indifference diminishes us all
When we read recently about the murder of four Spokane women in the last three months, and nine since 1990, we wondered why the police were only now intensifying their investigation, why each murder received little publicity, why there was no community outrage. Is it because each of the women worked as a prostitute, and was therefore less worthy of our attention?
Imagine by contrast a scenario in which four women are shot to death within three months while jogging on Spokane’s South Hill. Reaction by the police, media and community would be strong and swift.
It’s easy to blame the police for not taking prostitute murders seriously, the media for not jumping on this story sooner and the community as a whole for sitting idly by. Perhaps the blame lies with every one of us who casually flips through the paper without giving the murder of a prostitute a second thought.
We care about crime if we think it might happen to us or someone like us. But when we see details of another prostitute murder in the news, we can’t identify because they aren’t “like us.” Few of us personally know a prostitute. They aren’t our mothers, wives, sisters or daughters.
But the truth is, Darla Sue Scott was someone’s daughter, as were the other eight women. And they were part of our community. When one member of our community is victimized, we are all victimized. And when the murder of members of our community is met with indifference, we ourselves are diminished. Michael L. Farrell and members St. Ann’s Church and community, Spokane
No way is Spokane’s act together
Apparently, city officials still don’t understand that they work for the people. We’ve given them all the guidance they need and they still whine there’s no money for anything. Their job is to plan and execute the basic functions of government: safety, sanitation, infrastructure (roads and transportation). Feel-good, quality-of-life actions are low on the pole.
As a 33-year resident, I’ve seen the high of Expo ‘74 to the apathy of present-day bureaucrats and administrators. City government is run by the employees’ unions, special interests and political hacks. Instead of giving them a cost-of-living raise, let them go.
But I can understand why we have our leadership. We have allowed growth to go uncontrolled, both in population and in government, with developers and their agents taking the profits of expansion and giving the citizens the burden of paying for the infrastructure to support that growth. Can anyone get anywhere on our roads between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. or 4 p.m. and 6 p.m.?
I remember discussion about a north-south freeway 25 years ago. It’s still in the planning stages? Our bloated transit system can’t see why ridership is around 20-30 percent. How about routes, buses and schedules that fit the needs of the community?
We shut major roads down for months for improvements. How many millions of man hours are lost due to poor planning? When are we going to realize we need to do road work like the West side, between 10 p.m. and 4 a.m.? How about giving contracts with a time line? J.W. Magnuson Jr. Spokane
WASHINGTON STATE
Better than refunding, lower tax rate
So, we have legislators who want to give the taxpayers of Washington state a $70 refund because of a huge tax surplus? Good idea but I have a better one.
Sure, show me the money. But if we have that much of a tax surplus, could it be that “we the people” are overtaxed?
I encourage them to drop the tax rate on the source of this revenue. We have never seen that done before! Tim A. Carson Spokane
PEOPLE
I’m tired of disreputable teenagers
Why can’t I do a little shopping downtown without getting panhandled by sassy, bratty, mindless, smoking teens? With some manners, a haircut, a shave and a few nose, ear, eyebrow and lip rings removed, they might qualify for employment somewhere, satisfying an ever-growing need in an ever-shrinking job pool.
What angers me most about the self-imposed cesspool they exist in and the direction they choose in this life is the seemingly negligent attitude they have toward themselves. There is no sense of pride, and without that there can be no sense of shame.
Oh, how I wish it were politically correct to shake some sense into these kids or tell them straight out that they are wasting the time God gave them. But then, they might ask if this God person had any money to spare, if I wasn’t going to give them any. Greg K. Johnson Spokane
Yes, be your own honest person
I read with interest James A. Nelson’s letter regarding total commitment in marriage. While I agree that one must be totally committed to one’s marriage for it to succeed, I disagree with his comment regarding the phrase, “to be your own person.”
Nelson states that that phrase “and its fallout, has been the bane of American marriages.” It wasn’t until I fully accepted the reality of being my own person in the 1970s that I met a man who could truly love me. He didn’t fall in love with the person I pretended to be in an attempt to please him, but with who I was.
To be your own person includes being giving, loving, caring, able to compromise, accepting of your spouse - the full range of a personality. One hopes it does not mean “I have to have everything my way or else.”
My husband is his own person. I am my own person and my children are their own people. That means we care for each other because that’s what “our own people” do. It means that when it’s time for compromise, that’s what we do because that’s what our own people do. Sacrifice for our marriage and family is not a dirty word to our own people.
We don’t have a perfect marriage but we recently celebrated our 16th anniversary and we have children we’re proud of.
You don’t have to be selfish to be your own person, you just have to be honest. Deborah Lawrence Hale Greenacres
IN THE PAPER
The thinking disregard your opinions
Your Nov. 23 Perspective page resulted in a good family discussion. We are glad to hear that this issue has caused internal debate; this is healthy!
Managing editor Scott Sines, our family cares about this topic and your internal turmoil. Your earlier majority editorial view is simplistic, ridiculous and irresponsible.
Yes, we are each responsible for our action-inaction. But to say that anyone who puts him or herself at risk is responsible for others taking advantage of them expresses the general lack of personal responsibility our society is lacking.
We all agree with reporters Kelly McBride and Jim Camden, who expressed the point well: Placing oneself at risk of some physical or emotional injury does not relieve the rest of us from the responsibility to not take advantage of them!
On one hand you feel no one will care, then you’re worried that breaching the wall between commentary and reporting will damage the “credibility” of your reporting. Do you really think so highly of yourselves? Very few readers/listeners see much distinction between reporting and editorializing, except that they are sometimes clearly stated as such. Too often the opinion in a reported story is made, purposely or not, subtly via detail left unsaid or partial quotes. In your collective editorial egotism, your majority staff fails to perceive the fact that truly thinking individuals don’t give a rat’s ass what opinion a magazine, TV station or newspaper has; except that it may impact the opinions of the many readers and listeners who don’t practice the art of critical thinking. Fred and Jeri Fischer Coeur d’ Alene
Mental illness headlines wrong
Regarding the Nov. 27 Region section headline, “Shooting suspect is schizophrenic.”
Just the week before you published a very thoughtful letter from an individual who wrote to ask you not to publish articles that foster stereotyping of persons with mental illness as violent and dangerous. Your response was this headline.
I understand that the man accused in this shooting was identified as schizophrenic by his own attorney. I do not, however, understand why this information was made the focus of your article in a headline that only serves to affirm people’s fears and suspicions that all persons with mental illness are violent and dangerous. Individuals with mental disabilities and their families struggle with these stereotypes every day as they attempt to live independent, responsible lives in our community.
For this reason, many people are afraid even to disclose that they have or have had a mental disability, for fear they will lose their jobs or their homes.
I hope that in the future your staff will take more care to avoid headlines which foster prejudice, fear and hostility towards persons with mental disabilities. Florence R. Brassier Spokane
Don’t aid adult-oriented businesses
Your Dec. 2 editorial about the importance of stable families and secure children in society was extremely well written. I appreciate your support and belief that families are critical to the strength of America’s cities.
It’s encouraging that many churches are also seeing the importance and are stepping up to the plate to raise the standard for marriage again. If things are going to change, it will take everyone’s efforts, not just the church’s. Let me encourage you to consider how you can make a difference
Currently, The Spokesman-Review advertises and promotes adult entertainment; Deja Vu is a prime example. These establishments have been shown, through research, to have a detrimental impact on families. In other major cities, (Cincinnati, for example) editors/owners have chosen not to print advertisements for such establishments because of their commitment to families and community values.
The Review’s policies have a powerful impact on Spokane. I hope you’ll take this opportunity as you speak out for strengthening families to go one step further and re-evaluate your current policy on advertising and promoting adult entertainment.
This is a great opportunity for The Spokesman-Review to further its work to make Spokane the greatest city in which to raise a stable family. Your role is critical and your continued efforts are appreciated. Great editorial! Tom W. Monforton Spokane
Barbie editorial good for laughs
Re: staff writer Jamie Tobias Neely’s Nov. 29 editorial, “Less-lithe doll a healthy sign,” about Barbie.
I’ve never laughed so much over one of Neely’s Our Views. One week she says global warming might have caused Ice Storm ‘96. Now she says all the wacko anorexic women in the world are that way possibly because of buxom Barbie!
Neely’s most obvious slant in her cry columns is her incessant need to save the general public (mostly the females) from all the politically incorrect, cultural stereotypes that made America so wonderfully diverse in its attitudes.
Wouldn’t this be a very dull place if we all thought like Neely and The Spokesman-Review editorial board? Mike Forster Spokane
BELIEFS
Yes, religious types are pushy
Re: Mary O. Caloia’s Dec. 2 letter, “Pushy religious types get it wrong.”
Your letter was so full of bitterness and anger, I found it confusing that you ended it with a reference to Biblical love. “Having love for all of God’s creations,” you said.
Well, Mary Caloia, this includes the people “intent on saving souls,” the bigots, the hateful and yes, even the condemning. If you practice what you preach, you would love these also.
Most of us “religious types” are only trying to be obedient to the word of God, which you semi-quoted, by standing up for what is right. Not only does the Bible tell us to love one another, it tells us to “Preach the Word; correct, rebuke and encourage with great patience and careful instruction,” (II Tim. 4:2).
Most of us “pushy religious types” are only too aware of our faults and shortcomings, which only make us all the more aware of our need for Jesus, his forgiveness, grace and mercy.
In your letter I couldn’t help but notice all the references to yourself. All of the me, mys and Is revealed why Christianity “never worked” for you. It’s because it’s not about you. It’s about Jesus Christ, acknowledging the price he paid for you and giving him all of you in return. Reading this only made me sad and determined to pray for you.
Don’t desire hell; you might get what you ask for. Michele K. Martin Spokane
No Christian government intended i
Letter writers Mike Matiska and Marilyn Lawson argue that our founding fathers intended to establish a Christian nation. There is no doubt that all or most of them were Christians and that their religious beliefs influenced the principles of the government they devised, for which we can all be grateful. But that is not the same thing as saying they intended the government to be organizationally Christian.
While the “Creator” is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, there is no reference to God, Christ or Christian in the Constitution. No religious requirement for office is specified for members of Congress or for the president.
The oath of office for president prescribed in the Constitution (Art. II, sec. 8) makes no reference to God.
The Constitution did not establish an official church and the First Amendment forbade Congress from doing so.
All this is evidence that while the framers may have been guided by Christian principles, they did not intend to establish a specifically Christian government.
Chief Justice John Marshall’s statement, “The American population is entirely Christian” cited by Lawson was clearly false. The population certainly included atheists, agnostics, Jews and Unitarians, none of whom accepted the divinity of Jesus.
Lawson cites de Tocqueville’s 1830 statement that Christianity was stronger in the United States than in any other country. Interesting, because most other Christian countries had an established religion supported and controlled by their governments. This suggests that religion thrives best when not officially enmeshed with the government. Robert E. Forman Colville, Wash.
PARTING SHOT
Know what group’s name means
Re: “Hispanic voter group surrenders document” (Nov. 28).
This group is Hermandad Mexicana Nacional, which is the center of an immigrant voter fraud investigation. No one ever accurately translates the meaning of this group’s name. It means “the brotherhood of Mexican nationals.”
Why do they always call it a Hispanic rights organization? It’s like calling the Aryan Brotherhood a white voter group. Henry Warlow Hope, Idaho