Letters To The Editor

VETERANS

Time to accept and to move on

I was in Vietnam when Jane Fonda was denouncing us to the world. Our platoon swore an oath that we would never watch another Fonda movie. I was in the Central Highlands during our Laotian invasion. We listened to Armed Forces Radio as President Nixon swore that no American troops were inside Laos. We just swore.

I’ll never forget my first day back in the “world.” Two teenage girls saw my Army khakis and said, in the most sarcastic voice I’ve ever heard, “Oh, wow, a Marine!”

That was no worse, however, than being refused admittance to our Air Force base at Phan Rang because our long hair and cut-off or unbloused Army fatigues didn’t meet Air Force dress codes.

We had a right to be bitter when we came home. Fonda was a jerk. The semi-skilled campus intellectuals who despised and abused us were fools who didn’t know the difference between a GRUNT and REMF.

Fortunately, people and times change.

To you vets who still feel the bitterness, remember our favorite saying? Don’t mean nothin’! That time has come. This country has apologized to us as best it can.

We’re getting old, fellows. It’s time to accept the apology. That’s the only way we can retire in peace.

I’ll go see the wall. I hope to find my friend, Ray Horner’s, name. I don’t know what emotions I’ll feel, but when I’m done, I think I’ll go see a Jane Fonda movie. L. Jim Shamp Cheney

Wall a monument to terrible wrong

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial replica is indeed a “moving” wall; it most definitely is not a healing wall. The sheer numbers of U.S. citizens denied their Constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness smacks you upside the head, clenches your gut and tightens your heart so hard that tears of frustration cannot be cut off.

Whenever, however, could a wall either physically or emotionally promote healing?

This exhibit of U.S. government support of big business and corporate power at the expense of so many, many young people is an important statement of U.S. history that indeed should never be forgotten. But please, don’t call it a healing wall. Call it what it is: an unconscionable list of people who died for the sole purpose of protecting and promoting the economic interest of U.S. and foreign corporate power. Barbara Eddy Smith Spokane

U.S. AND THE WORLD

Bad policy brought to a nuclear head

The recent flap over India’s nuclear tests shines a nauseating light upon the Clinton administration’s foreign policy, or lack thereof.

China, the world’s largest totalitarian dictatorship, has been selling nuclear and missile technologies to India’s archenemy, Pakistan. Recently, Pakistan tested some of these missiles. They worked fine; more than accurate enough to deliver a nuke to New Delhi. There was barely a peep out of the White House regarding any of this.

As far as the Clinton administration is concerned, China can do no wrong. Nothing it does can get its Most Favored Nation trading partner status revoked. The frightening aspect of all of this is that the Clinton administration didn’t realize the Indians were going to notice what was going on.

India, the world’s largest democracy, got the message loud and clear. The Indians realized the White House had no intention of confronting China, regardless of what it pulled. After all, there might be economic repercussions. It’s a lot safer to get on India’s case. India has a history of minding its own business. It makes a good unsuspecting scapegoat.

Unfortunately, the Clinton administration’s stance may wind up being the final nail in the coffin of nuclear arms control. Those in it must not realize every Third World nation is watching as the White House totally disregards the moral issues and bases decisions solely on economic considerations.

No doubt, the most cynical politicians in India have been vindicated. To Indians, the Clinton administration’s position must look like proof that they did the right thing by testing their nuclear weapons. Marc F. Lawson Spokane

If U.S. can, why can’t India?

Since the United States obviously finds great deterrence value in its own nuclear arsenal, what right does it have to deny that same mode of protection to other nations? If the United States can have nuclear weapons, all other countries should be able to have nuclear weapons.

Any other stance is sheer hypocrisy. Margaret E. Koivula Spokane

BELIEFS

Church better off without writer

In keeping with The Spokesman Review’s recent anti-Christian bias, we now have staff writer Beverly Vorpahl (“Goodbye, church,” commentary, May 23) trashing her ex-church for the benefit of the readership. How revolting and how typical.

Vorpahl says, “It’s never been easy to be a liberal-minded woman and a Baptist.” Well, duh! Baptists generally believe the Bible. They don’t hear voices telling them it’s OK to make exceptions for homosexual behavior when God’s word clearly doesn’t.

Perhaps your smug (don’t pray for me) staff writer would feel a bit more comfortable in any one of the many liberal churches so frequently highlighted in The Spokesman-Review religion section. What is certain is that the American Baptist Church is better off without morally confused people occupying its board positions and Vorpahl is certainly better off as well … for what is cold may yet be made hot, but that which is lukewarm is destined for destruction.

Yes, “God is indeed alive and He speaks.” What he doesn’t do is change to accommodate man’s immorality. Were he to do that, he might just as well become a staff writer for The Spokesman-Review. Paul J. Schrag Davenport, Wash.

So, find agreeable church and join

Re: Beverly Vorpahl’s commentary, “Goodbye, church,” was an excellent example of intolerance.

In a day when we need more tolerance toward all beliefs, Vorpahl suggests that her former church members change their beliefs to become more liberal, like hers. While arguing that the Muslims, Jews and Buddhists are excluded from heaven in her former church’s view, she doesn’t mention that these same religions are equally exclusive in their own beliefs.

Where is the outcry that they conform to your brand of religion? There are churches that believe that all roads lead to God. My recommendation is that Vorpahl join one, rather than attempt to change those who choose to believe differently than she does.

Vorpahl’s argument is better directed at Jesus, not at those who choose to believe what he said. William C. Gimness, O.D. Chewelah, Wash.

‘Christianity is you and Christ’

“Goodbye, church” by Beverly Vorpahl (May 23) did not invoke anger in me, nor did it invoke pity. Instead, I pose this: If you need to say goodbye to the church you have grown up in, then say hello to what Christianity really can be.

Christianity is not a church or a denomination. It is not men or women deciding the fate of members. Christianity is you and Christ, unique in your relationship and as diversified in his plan for you as there are peoples on Earth. Neither I nor anyone else can dictate your fate. But you do have one responsibility as a Christian: Know what God says about being a Christian, read and study your Bible.

You may have been around the Bible for many years being raised in church. But your time alone, reading and earnestly seeking the truth, will bring answers from the source. If you are upset with the rulings of your church, it is good to move on. They have a responsibility to lead their ministry as they see fit.

You have requested for people not to pray for you to “see the error of your way.” God is clear on his purpose for prayer as the example in 1 Samuel 12:23 of the Old Testament shows. “As for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the Lord by failing to pray for you.” (NIV)

As a Christian, I will pray for the truth of the Gospel to set you free -really free. Cindy Scinto Greenacres

Homosexuals’ lifestyle can’t be accepted

Maybe it is better for Beverly Vorpahl to leave the church, when you think of the large number of members who would leave if the church decided to accept homosexuals, especially a homosexual pastor. Homosexuality and adultery are condemned in the Bible in the same sentence. It isn’t enough to say you believe in God. You have to live a Christian life, according to the teachings of the Bible. I heard some time ago that a church in San Francisco had a 75 percent success rate in turning homosexuals around. It’s the lifestyle the church can’t accept. The church still loves the person. Edna Silver Spokane

Pastors respond on the Religion page in today’s IN Life.

OTHER TOPICS

Good piece short four talented writers

As an avid reader, I was delighted to see staff writer Dan Webster’s article on Northwest writers. The article was interesting and informative, and the authors featured were more than deserving of mention. I do, however, have one small complaint, and that is the lack of mention of four of the most successful writers in the country, writers who all reside in the Pacific Northwest.

Stella Cameron, Jayne Anne Krentz, Debbie Maccomber (originally from Yakima) and Linda Lael Miller (from the Spokane area) are all writers whose works consistently appear on the New York Times and USA Today best seller lists. Krentz and Maccomber have had films made of their books, and Krentz is well known for her plots featuring Northwest settings and characters.

For these authors not to be mentioned, even in passing, in an article about Northwest writers is an oversight I cannot allow to pass unchallenged.

The only explanation I can find for such an oversight is that these authors’ books are “popular” fiction, while the books mentioned in the article were “literary.” (A distinction I as a reader and a writer have never understood.) Still, one would think authors whose sales figures are in the millions of dollars, and whose books are reviewed in Publishers Weekly and Library Journal, would merit some mention in an article on regional writers in a regional newspaper.

Perhaps Webster might consider a similar article on popular and genre fiction, thereby giving these talented authors their due. Joan Overfield Spokane

Public schools really public enemy

Isn’t it time for our statist politicians to consider making it a crime to send a child to a public school? How many more school killings will make the news? How many teachers will be attacked? How many drugs will be dealt? How many young, fragile psyches will be destroyed by undeserved peer pressure? Will more students be forced to submit to strip searches or involuntary volunteerism? How many students will finish 13 years of “education” without learning to read or write fluently?

The most important question to ask yourself: when will you pull your children out of public school? Can you justify abandoning your children to this government nightmare? Shouldn’t every parent take responsibility and protect their children from its danger? At what point do PTO meetings and letters to your lawmaker become empty substitutes for real action to care for your own?

Millions of American children attend private school or homeschool; doesn’t your child deserve a market based school that is responsive to your consumer needs, or a home education that personalizes and cares better than any education professional ever could?

Rearrange your life and do what it takes but don’t let your kids be a victim of this country’s most invasive and socially destructive government program. If enough people run from the disaster, politicians might someday get government out of the education business, refunding to taxpayers the more than $5000/student/year cost of the public school debacle.

Until then, eat the difference and move out of Hillary’s village. Greg D. Holmes Spangle, Wash.

Clinton a thoroughgoing sellout

Let’s see now, what do you call a person who sells militarily useful technology to the enemy? That’s just what President Clinton did to finance his re-election in 1996. Now China has a guidance system that will improve the accuracy of its nuclear missiles.

That goes to show what Clinton will do for a few hundred thousand dollars. No wonder the Democrats are doing everything to sidetrack this investigation. Clinton sure isn’t loyal to his country. But what do you expect; he wasn’t loyal to his wife. Glenn Herman Moses Lake

LAW ENFORCEMENT

Blame lies with evader, not police

Re: The May 22, article “Family investigates fatal chase.”

Personal responsibility is something we should all use and Carrie Kraft should think about this before she lays blame. I feel for her loss, but who was running? Who ran red lights, endangered other motorists and was speeding? Christopher Kraft.

Christopher Kraft didn’t care about his actions; he was trying to get away. For all of us, it comes down to personal responsibility. The driver is in control, not the police chasing them or the public. Personal responsibility. I remind myself of those two words every day and say them to my son often. Don’t blame others for your own actions.

The police department has a job to do. It is to protect the public. Carrie Kraft asked if it was worth it, referring to the chase. I say yes it was. Was it meant to end the way it did? I’m sure no police officer wants it to end the way it did.

Personal responsibility. Carrie Kraft needs to think about those two words. Gabrielle F. Tilley Spokane

Man’s bad decision cost him his life

After reading “Family investigates fatal crash,” I’m saddened that the relatives cannot accept that fact that Christopher Kraft is responsible for his own death. This is but a symptom of our society today. No one wants to accept responsibility for their own actions and someone else is always to blame. Christopher Kraft had a choice that morning. He paid the ultimate price for his stupidity. Robert E. Walker Newman Lake, Wash.

Evading police never worth risk

I’m so tired of picking up the newspaper and reading about citizens/law enforcement officers, because someone has died while evading police. Don’t get me wrong, it’s tragic to lose someone that way. But we need a reality check. These people would still be alive had they made the choice to stop, as we all are expected to do within the limits of the law.

How about if we take some time to think about the children and adults injured for life by people who think they’re above the law and so run red lights or break the speed limit? I can’t imagine any traffic fine or sentence worth risking my life to avoid. Donna J. Peterson Spokane