Letters To The Editor

PEOPLE AND ANIMALS

Some pet owners shouldn’t be

Dear neighbor:

Because you can do something does not mean you should.

For the last year you have had a loving dog locked in your back yard. From time to time you come out and feed him or take him into the house. Weather doesn’t seem to be a consideration because he is out day and night through all weather.

You won’t train him because in your words, “He is too dumb to learn anything.” This breed is very intelligent and learns fast.

On a recent Thursday, you were gone all day and all night, again, with no concern for your dog in the heat. He had no water. I gave him food and water, again. That was the last time I saw him.

You were gone all weekend. Your dog was left with no food or water all weekend. I didn’t see him, so I figured that you took him with you. When you came back, you asked if I had seen him. No, I haven’t seen him. Maybe he finally got smart and went looking for the love and attention he didn’t find in your yard.

Do me and him a favor. If he does turn up, don’t go get him. Let some loving family take him home. Someone who will treat him better than you did. Someone who will give him food, water and attention, and not leave him alone for days at a time. This dog deserves more. Dianne Hammond Coeur d’Alene

How about a rider suicide race?

Re: Omak Suicide Race.

The death of a horse, a lovely, gentle animal, was called an accident? When was the last time you saw a horse, of its own volition, ride down a steep embankment at full gallop at night into a deep pool of water? He has better sense; it’s known as horse sense.

If men want to continue this ridiculous race in order to test their macho abilities, let them do it without horses.

An accident? No, a very predictable death of an innocent horse. Jean Landis Bonners Ferry, Idaho

RECREATION

Great outdoors isn’t a rumpus room

Re: Chris Peck’s editorial of Aug. 7 concerning personal watercraft, “The great outdoors isn’t a quiet room.”

What a pompous, self-serving pronouncement. If you don’t like the noise, take a hike? In other words, get out of my space so I can have my fun and don’t burden me with regulations. What a childish, uninformed, egotistical attitude.

It’s all about the incompatibility of some recreational activities, isn’t it? Whereas fishing from an anchored boat isn’t an annoying activity, can the same be said for the noise made by a Jet Ski? Check the Milt Priggee cartoon of the same date.

Personal watercraft operations are responsible for a disproportionate share of watercraft accidents, both fatal and otherwise. Are these signals we should just ignore? Being sane and sober didn’t help the athletic Sergio Allen, did it?

Once Peck gets over his petulant funk, maybe he will be able to offer some suggestions as to how we can all get along in the great outdoors. Charles W. Booth Cheney

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

Many are discriminated against

I would like to expand lifestyle choice protection beyond a select one, homosexuality.

The poor - need I say more?

The drug user or drunk. They can’t hold and often can’t even apply for jobs because of drug testing. They may be born this way. Who are we to judge?

The thief. It’s his way of living, but he is put in jail for it.

The gang member. He should be able to make his bones. It’s just part of his lifestyle.

The undereducated. They are turned down for jobs they could do without a degree. They may not want a formal education, just equal opportunities.

The landlord or employer. They can tell if a person is Caucasian but how do they know if someone is gay? It’s their property or their company and they should be able to rent to or hire whomever they prefer.

The Christians. They can’t even have organized prayer sessions in school and they have to associate in schools, jobs, and their church with people whose lifestyles are against the Christian doctrine. At the same time, they are bashed and persecuted by homosexuals and others for beliefs some consider politically incorrect. Where is the lifestyle choice protection there?

These are but a few of the different lifestyle choices we’ll have to give the same special rights to. Does the Constitution not give us all the right to free association? Gail H. Gerlach Spokane

CREATION VS. EVOLUTION

Science tells what, how but not why

One of the most basic things I learned in my introduction to physics course in college was that science tries only to explain how the material world operates. Science is a description of the material world, not a judgment about it.

The basic questions of science are answered with “how,” not “why.” Physiology describes how the anatomy of man operates, not why man exists.

Science is about the physical world and it has no test which can measure any part of a conjectured spiritual world. Spirit is immaterial and therefore not open to description by scientific test or mathematical formula. Any statement by science about the spiritual world is outside of science. Any scientist who speaks of spiritual matters speaks as a lay person.

Conversely, any spiritual leader who tries to make scientific statements is necessarily speaking as a secularist about the material world. Religious leaders have no authority in scientific matters and neither does the Bible.

The Bible must be a guide to spiritual matters, not a scientific text. The two worlds, materials and spiritual, do not meet. Whatever the Bible says ought be understood to be allegorical, metaphorical or parabolic, about the spiritual world.

The Bible is trivialized if we try to understand it literally. Understood as an artifact in sociology, the Garden of Eden becomes a nice story; many primitive peoples have wonderful stories about their origins. However, if the Garden of Eden is understood as a parable about humanity and morality, then we have a solid spiritual beginning. It is not trivialized by science and has import. George T. Thomas Spokane

Science need not know all

Re: Angel Fitzpatrick Jr.’s letter of Aug. 10, “Religion doesn’t belong in school.”

The belief in creation science is not just an Old Testament “Christian” belief. Evolution theory began with Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species” in 1859, and a lot of debate regarding teaching of creationism in the schools versus evolution has passed since that time.

Darwin advances three challenges to theology. First, he propounds an undirected and random order to the universe without design. Second, he suggests “survival of the fittest.” Third, the impersonal nature of a universe created without purpose or guidance. See “Evolution and the Uniqueness of Humankind” by Francisco Ayala in “Origins” (Feb. 12, 1998, Vol. 27, No. 34).

I have written to the Institute for Creation Research about the Post Falls matter. To know more, write: ICR, Box 2667, El Cajon, CA 92021 or call 619-448-0900.

Personally, I agree with Pope John Paul II, who has said, “the theory of evolution is more than a hypothesis” (Oct. 22, 1996). But, “One day is as a thousand years” as 2 Peter 3:8 tells us, and how God creates (cloning, in vitro and DNA research notwithstanding) I hope will always remain a mystery to man. Cinda L. Smaagaard Spokane

IN THE PUBLIC EYE

Diversion in a faraway place perhaps?

Tension with Iraq? Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania? With his appearance before the grand jury just days away, I wonder which foreign affair will prevent President Clinton from testifying about his domestic affair. Wag the dog, Mr. President, wag the dog. Mark S. Kent Spokane

Proposal exercise in egotism

In relation to egotist Rep. Jim McDermott’s suggestion to rename the Spokane Federal Courthouse after Tom Foley, I would like to remind the people of Spokane that egotist Foley stabbed 100,000 constituents in the back when he voted for the Brady bill. Ken D. Bryant Spokane