Letters To The Editor

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT

Temper justice with mercy

Re: Catholic bishops’ plea to not inflict capital punishment on Timothy McVeigh:

The bishops are reminding us of “The Lord’s Prayer.” We are called to forgive, not forget, McVeigh; to love this man unconditionally, in spite of his evil behavior. To respect his dignity as a child of God and as our brother, even though he has chosen to violate his own God-given dignity and his true relationship with us, his fellow citizens.

We continue to love him even though he has chosen to harm us. This is how we create the kingdom of God in America. “Compassion and mercy are a tremendously creative act,” Bishop Skylstad says.

Vengeance degrades the person and the society who seek it. Vengeance honors neither the dead nor the living. Punishment that protects us from the McVeighs among us, i.e. life in prison, is sufficient for him and for us. James J. Flynn Spokane

Temper mercy with protective action

Here we go again. Bishop William Skylstad and the other bishops are urging compassion and mercy for a mass murderer - namely, Timothy McVeigh.

Hey, bishops, let’s be really merciful. How can we be so callous and uncaring by even locking him up? Let’s just let him and all the other misunderstood murderers loose so we can show our compassion and mercy. Maybe you can be really, really merciful and give them jobs in your parish, passing around the collection plates and stuff.

Come on, the federal government hasn’t even executed anyone since 1963, but this would be a good start.

Bishops, there’s a time for mercy and time for justice. Your mercy is killing us. G. Howard Danielson Spokane

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Government increasingly oppressive

Jim Wright’s June 8 column about “Our Democratic government” reminds me of a meeting at Mead High School, where supporters of the Growth Management Act applauded a man who said, “How can anyone be mad at government? Government is all of us. We are, after all, a democracy.”

Wrong. We are not a democracy. Thank God! While conquering China, the Red Army would gather villagers and demand that they denounce landowners and anyone who didn’t support communism. The villagers when had to decide by voice vote if those denounced would be executed on the spot. That’s democracy.

By virtue of our Constitution, we are a republic. The majority rules through government, and government’s power is limited, especially by the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, which protects each individual from government.

The government is violating this basic law, however, and pandering to the majority of the moment. One example will do. The Constitution says that private property won’t be taken for public use without just compensation. Despite this, regulators force owners to keep land in a natural state as wetlands or habitat for plants or animals, to benefit the public, and claim with a straight face that no taking has occurred, even if this makes the land’s value drop by 95 percent.

Wright is right about people being taught to hate the government. The teachers are people like Wright, who was removed as speaker of the House for misconduct, and by an increasingly intrusive, oppressive and criminal government led by the Clinton White House. Edwin G. Davis Spokane

Wright discredited and worse, a liberal

The June 8 commentary by Jim Wright appears to have struck new lows, both by The Spokesman-Review and by Wright himself.

I resided in Washington, D.C., until last year, where I was privileged to know a junior Republican representative from one of the Midwest states. On several occasions he told me Wright deliberately obstructed the Republicans in their attempts to affect legislation. Wright was described as pompous, overbearing and an ardent liberal, significantly less civil than his predecessor, Tip O’Neil.

That Wright should now decry the lack of trust between the government and governed seems hypocrisy of the first order. (Recall his strident, overt and behind-the-scenes support of the now-discredited Sandanista regime.)

Under investigation for financial misdealing, Wright was the only speaker of the House to resign in lieu of legal action. Your failure to make mention of that fact lends credibility to Wright that he does not deserve. Wright should be accepting responsibility for the lack of trust that he decries; who is willing to put full faith in a government in which he, Tony Coelho, Daniel Rostenkowski and other liberals had to leave in disgrace. Perhaps the “cattle futures queen” and the “adulterer-in-chief” may be a part of the trust issue, although I failed to see a reference to Whitewater, Filegate, etc. in Wright’s column. George A. Bratina Spokane

I won’t honor this ungodly nation

Recently, my younger brother asked my father why we never fly a flag on Flag Day. We have the bracket mounted out front and we have the flag; it seems logical that we would.

My father, a retired Air Force officer, suggested we consider what a flag represents. I came to the following conclusion:

A flag is a symbol of everything a country stands for. When you fly the flag, you are publicly proclaiming you stand for the beliefs and values the flag represents.

Now, let’s look at what our country stands for.

In 1973, Roe vs. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton opened the door for legalized abortions. Homosexual rights is now a cause our country and its courts seem to support. The media have become openly hostile toward Christians. Our president has a well-earned reputation as a womanizer, draft dodger and drug abuser. He may also have been involved in illegal financial transactions.

Under the guise of tolerance, our government is mandating that schools present corrupt and immoral teachings. So you can be assured that the next generation will be even more undisciplined than the present one.

The moral and social decline of this nation is disturbing. Our country has turned its back on God.

Should a Christian, who is trying to be a light to the world and not be conformed to the world, fly a flag on Flag Day? I think not, but I look forward to the day when I can. That day will come when our country regains a proper respect for God. Andrew J. Schrag, age 13 Davenport, Wash.

So-called disrespect is protected speech

I have found some recent letters to the editor alarming. Writers have suggested that “disrespect” causes violence and, therefore, should be illegal or forbidden, e.g., political dissent or criticism of any government employee, agency, or action, or any ideas, thoughts, feelings, or beliefs which others may consider disagreeable or repugnant.

Such ideas are frightening to me as they bring to mind images of the “insane” (political dissidents) in the USSR who were locked away in “hospitals,” to be “treated.” These ideas also remind me of the Chinese students who dared to criticize their government, who sought freedom and met with the violence of government guns and tanks.

A government that would punish thought is not the kind of government I want.

While people will disagree on almost any subject and while people may hate other people for any number of reasons, it is not one’s thoughts or beliefs that should be punished. It is one’s crimes against others that should be punished. Meanwhile, the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights still guarantee us our freedom of speech and that should be respected. Janice M. Moerschel Spokane

President put his power first

Once again President Clinton has proved that his word isn’t worth a plug nickel.

During the flooding in the upper Midwest, he took advantage of the situation to provide himself a photo op by flying out to North Dakota and promising the people he would put politics aside and flood relief for them on a fast track.

Last week, he vetoed the flood relief bill because Republicans added a condition to prevent another government shutdown this fall, should a budget agreement not be reached. By vetoing the flood relief package, he admitted his political leverage of a threatened government shutdown is far more important to him than is relief for devastated American flood victims. He also proved his word is worth nothing. A. Jean Bell Springdale, Wash.

U.S. AND THE WORLD

U.S. starves innocent Iraqis

Periodically we are reminded of the Jewish victims of the Nazi Holocaust, and the questions invariably arise: Why didn’t the German people stop it? Why didn’t they protest?

The response, too, has assumed a standard form: Because they didn’t know. There is nothing they could have done.

The reply may be accurate. Certainly the Nazi media, under direction of Joseph Goebels, tightly controlled public information.

For the past six years, another holocaust has been taking place. Its victims are children, the aged and the infirm. They aren’t railroaded to gas chambers, then incinerated, but they die, predictably, of malnutrition, starvation and disease. Reputable sources estimate that 4,500 Iraqi children a month die of these causes.

The victims are systematically and effectively deprived of food and medicines by fiat of the U.S. government issued through the United Nations - an embargo. Since the end of the gulf war, approximately 600,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of this embargo.

Where are the American voices raised to protest this current, invisible holocaust? Why don’t the American people stop it? And what is the duty of the media, to investigate and report facts to the people so they may make an informed judgment?

We do know. There are things we can do to stop the slaughter. Pressure on our elected representatives can change this abhorrent policy. Or are we content to be tried by history, and be found wanting? Al Mangan Spokane

IN THE PUBLIC EYE

Coulston is an exemplary physician

I am indignant and outraged about the media and Medical Quality Assurance Commission decision to publicize a mistake that Dr. Dan Coulston had called to the attention of the MQAC. He knew he had erred and took steps to correct that error.

Three years ago, Coulston became my husband’s personal physician, even though he has had a virtually closed practice for over 10 years. Since that time he has saved my husband’s life at least twice.

I have never encountered a more knowledgeable, competent, caring, compassionate and unpretentious physician. And with my husband’s many medical problems, I’ve met quite a few physicians.

To even mention Coulston’s name in the same article as Dr. Dexter Amend is like comparing gold to dirt, and does a great disservice to Coulston. Frances A. Waddell Otis Orchards

Volume discount for sin

Air Force Lt. Kelly Flinn. Army Maj. Gen. John Longhouser. Air Force Gen. Joseph Ralston. Public disclosure of an adulterous affair in the lives of each led, in the first two cases, to the curtailment of their active military careers, and, in the third, to the withdrawal of his candidacy for the post of chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

In contrast, the man elected to the highest political office in this land (and the most prestigious in the world) has in no manner suffered an interruption in his career, even though he is notoriously remiss in avoiding the same scandalous accusations. As governor, Clinton allegedly was serviced regularly by the uniformed Arkansas state Procurement Department, which evidently hustled for him on command. (Hello, Paula Jones?)

Amazing! Apparently, if an individual commits adultery with only one partner, it is a sin deserving of the highest official condemnation. But if one has many partners in adultery, the gravity of the sin so diminishes in inverse proportion to the sheer number of adulterous affairs that the sin itself disappears altogether. Talk about the public be damned! Paul G. Wilson Hayden Lake, Idaho