Letters To The Editor

SPOKANE MATTERS

With council’s help, woe be …

I guess we were gone, or maybe I wasn’t paying attention, but Sharon Pendergrast’s letter (July 26) was the first I saw that the Spokane City Council was supporting the Davenport Hotel project.

As a Spokane-area native who left while the Davenport was the high-class place to go, only to return to find it shut down, I’m really glad to see that it may open again. Of course, with Spokane City Council on its side, how can it fail?

Oh, yeah. There’s the parking garage controversy. Who knows? Soon, a new majority on the City Council may appear and all will be argument, blame and lawsuits.

Kind of makes me glad I live in Newman Lake! Glenn L. Sentman Newman Lake

People on foot, stay off roadway

Has anyone else in our fair city noticed how the streets are being taken over by joggers, dog walkers, mothers with strollers and irresponsible adults in general? It’s not our kids who are filling the streets, it’s their parents and grandparents!

When I was growing up, I was told not to play in the street. What happened?

I am sick of having to dodge four women abreast who look at you, when you are driving in the place where cars belong, as though you are the intruder. They give you a look that would kill and refuse to budge an inch and go to the curb, where they belong. Then, there’s having a mother with a stroller risk her life and her child’s by walking in the street.

The Spokane Police Department has done a very fine sting operation on drivers who refuse to give the right of way to pedestrians and has glorified it in the press. Now, isn’t it time for the police and drivers to take back their own streets for driving automobiles? And isn’t it time someone looked into the illegal practice of using the streets as running, walking and jogging tracks? We have sidewalks in most areas. Let’s use them! We have running tracks at schools, the Centennial Trail, etc., are made for this purpose.

Let’s use our auto horns more and get these people back in a safe area where they belong! David E. Mechals Spokane

CHURCH AND STATE

In history and law, separation is fact

The Reverend Jay M. Henning is wrong (Letters, July 25).

John Adams wrote that “the Church of Rome has made it an article of faith that no man can be saved out of their church, and all other religious sects approach this dreadful opinion in proportion to their ignorance …”

The Treaty With Tripoli, negotiated under George Washington, ratified by the the U.S. Senate and signed by President Adams in 1797 states that the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.

In the 1947 case of Everson vs. the Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “the First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.” Chris Farnam Spokane

Official prayer doesn’t belong

With all due respect to Sr. Cathy Beckley and Rev. Ron Greene, invocations are part of religious worship be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist or any other religious persuasion. While some may believe the Spokane City Council needs prayer, nonetheless, the exercising of religious worship - or any part of worship - before, during or after a City Council meeting is tantamount to the promotion of religion. Such action violates the spirit and intent of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and is at odds with the doctrine of separation of church and state.

Moreover, if the City Council is willing to thumb its collective nose at the U.S. Constitution, it risks undermining its moral authority.

Indeed, invocations belong in houses of worship, not in the halls of government. If the religious community of Spokane wishes to pray for the Spokane City Council, allow me to suggest some advice from the teachings of Jesus:

“When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; they love to say their prayers so everyone sees them. When you pray, go to your room, shut the door, and pray to your Father in secret and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.” Angel M. Fitzpatrick Jr. Fairfield, Wash.

Founders intended separation

Lisa Tanner’s letter, “Founders clearly men of faith” (July 20) needs some comment.

Many of the founding fathers no doubt were devout Christians but what they produced was a Constitution that separates government from organized religion. While we expect people to act on the basis of their personal beliefs, government is not to espouse specific church doctrines.

It is true that some early state constitutions required an affirmation of religious belief for public officeholders, restricted officeholding and even voting only to Protestants, thus ruling out Catholics and Jews. It might be noted that the required affirmations would not have barred from office King George III, head of the Church of England, who was accused in the Declaration of Independence of injuries, tyranny, abuses and despotism.

After the Constitution was adopted most states dropped their religious requirements. Delaware, mentioned by Tanner, added to its state constitution a provision in 1792 that there would be “no religious test” for office. The few states that retained a religious qualification for office in their constitutions stopped enforcing them. It was made official when the Supreme Court ruled that a state constitution could not have a religious requirement for office. Robert E. Forman Colville, Wash.

Perspective shapes attitude

I sympathize with Steve Eugster’s desire to stop prayer from being held at council meetings. It is very upsetting for some people to pray to a higher power when they really don’t believe there’s anyone higher than they are. After all, if you are supreme commanding emperor, who is above you? Dorothy E. Carter Spokane

Taken literally, Good Book turns bad

In reply to all who’ve written in about how the forefathers intended this country to be a Christian nation, I have learned a great deal from you and would like your advice in a few matters.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 19). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 217. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 3:52 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging. Kimberly Hargrove Cheney

OTHER TOPICS

Capital gains at a glacial pace

“You may pay dearly for investing advice” by John Cunniff (July 23) somewhat ranks below my personal experience with investment advice.

In 1973 on the advice of my own chosen stockbroker, I purchased 100 shares of a stock for $600. Within two weeks this investment was worth $400, and by 1974 it was worth $100. Being an astute investor, I held onto the stock. By 1979, the stock had undergone a 50-to-1 reverse split. Now, my 100 shares worth $6 per share had become two shares worth $3 per share (a total of $6). The company was still sending me its biannual updates in the typical glossy portfolio format praising the virtues of the company. The company reports to me were costing them more than my two shares were worth.

By 1983 and 1990, the company reincorporated under two other names.

This tale of investment woe does have a glimmer of silver lining. Over the past 20 years as a result of stock splits, my two shares have grown to 32 shares. As of close of business on July 20, my stock was selling for $25 per share. Put another way, my original 1973 investment of $600 has grown to $800, for a net profit of $7.41 per year. Perseverance does have its rewards, and I still have my original two shares.

I am now retired and my wife of 34 years reminds me we should be grateful we do not have to rely on my superior stock investment acumen for our livelihood. Paul G. Flood Usk, Wash.

Support humane Initiative 713

Re: “Animal trap proposal creates stir” (July 22).

I find it more than suspicious that our state’s Fish and Wildlife Commission would suddenly consider decreasing trap checking time to within 24 hours for those who choose to capture, torture and kill our wildlife for the outdated and completely unnecessary fur trade. Even if the trap checking times were decreased to hourly (unrealistic, as traplines have been known to stretch for miles), it would still mean an hour of confusion, fear and pain, relieved only through death by strangulation, beating or stomping to death. (That’s right, stomping - it’s cheaper than bullets and visible wounds reduce the sale value of the fur).

I encourage and support all trappers’ efforts to find a humane alternative, and I urge all of Washington’s citizens to please give our wildlife a fighting chance and vote yes on Initiative 713 on the November ballot. Kelly J. Tansy Spokane