Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, November 13, 1994 TAG: 9411180023
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: B2 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
News articles in the Roanoke Times & World-News in recent weeks cause one to question the wisdom of replacing one megaschool with an even larger one. The climate for educational excellence seems to be one fostered and nourished in a small-to-moderate-size setting with much community and parental involvement.
For some reason, consolidation of schools has been the norm in America for many years. Our theme seems to be that bigger is better. The new Cave Spring megaschool will be built to accommodate 1,400 to 1,600 students initially, with a possibility of growth to 1,800 to 2,000. That's enough room for many kids to get lost in the system and fall through the cracks.
I don't live in the Hidden Valley area, but I think a high school should be built there. Cave Spring High School's student body could be split in half. The Hidden Valley folks would provide great support for their new neighborhood high school, just as they do now for their junior high. Competition in academics and sports would be excellent for both schools, and for the faculties as well. Two groups of student leaders would be better than one.
The cost for building one 800-to-1,000-student school now should be a lot less than building a 1,600-to-2,000-student megaschool. Knowing the sensitivity of Cave Spring parents about having an older school, further planning would be appropriate to upgrade Cave Spring High as soon as practical.
The educational system should be supported by all of us. Our children's education is an obligation we should gladly bear. But the education system that has evolved over the years, in many places and in many cases, isn't really producing desired results. Maybe the size issue I'm raising here is an important one that's been ignored.
RALPH E. SMITH ROANOKE
Clinton isn't in Roosevelt's league
IN RESPONSE to Richard O'Dell's Oct. 27 letter, ``Veterans should stand with Robb'':
The biggest problem I'm having is where he refers to another commander in chief (Franklin Delano Roosevelt) who was a non-veteran president. To me, that's like comparing a thoroughbred to a donkey.
There's no comparison. I don't know whether O'Dell is aware of it, but Roosevelt was practically an invalid as a result of a crippling disease. If not for that, and had he been called upon to serve his country, he would have done so proudly.
We cannot say the same about President Clinton. He had an opportunity to serve his country; he chose not to.
I'm thankful we didn't have the likes of Clinton in the White House at the time Roosevelt served. If we had, this country would probably be under the rule of Nazi Germany, or the emperor of Japan, or both.
JOHN BLANKENSHIP ROANOKE
Better lost jobs than lost lives
I FAVOR increasing the federal excise tax on cigarettes by $2 per pack.
The American Medical Association states that smoking is the No. 1 cause of death in this country. As a physician of emergency medicine for 18 years, I've seen patients suffer and die from tobacco products every day.
Cigarettes kill and disable our citizens in a number of ways:
nLung cancer is the No. 1 cause of death from cancer in the United States.
nCigarette smoking has also been associated with cancers of the mouth, esophagus, bladder, pancreas, liver, kidney and colon. Thirty percent of all cancer deaths are caused by cigarettes.
nCigarette smoking is a major cause of strokes.
In 1993, 435,000 Americans died because of tobacco products. That was 1,192 deaths per day.
Many people argue that increasing the excise tax on cigarettes would cost jobs in Virginia. The tobacco industry states that a $2-per-pack tax increase would cost 7,500 tobacco-sector jobs. Even if this is true, 9,000 Virginians died from smoking-related diseases in 1993.
Which is more devastating - losing a job or your life? Is there any comparision?
DAVID O. LEWIS, M.D. MARTINSVILLE
Oh, the rarefied air of moral superiority
MAY I thank Professor Arthur R. Poskocil for his penetrating analysis of what made Oliver North supporters tick (Oct. 28 commentary, ``North supporters: Television made them do it'')? It's a relief to know those fainting spells in the nation's faculty lounges and newsrooms are ultimately due to dat ol' debbil television. One stands amazed by his brave attempt to rescue his countrymen from ``moral idiocy,'' and to haul us, by brute force of his powerful intellect, up to that high moral plateau inhabited by him and the rest of the nation's professors. I only hope the air isn't too thin for me up there.
Thank God the good professor showed up in time. Here I was, a college graduate who reads and thinks about issues, imagining I had arrived at my position through careful reasoning and discussion - only to learn from him that I was a dupe of television! And we haven't even had a tube in the house for more than two decades. I mean, are sociologists great or what?
Reminds me of what a physicist said about social scientists: ``They're so morally superior to the rest of us that they don't have to bother with the scientific method. Data occur to them.''
All this time, I figured I was thinking for myself when I supported a candidate who was opposed virtually unanimously by the mainstream media, government bureaucracy, academia and the rest of the liberal aristocracy. For some nutty reason, I supposed this made me an independent thinker. Pathetic moi, imagining I liked North because his positions on taxation, Social Security, abortion, crime, big government and family issues matched mine.
MARY WILLIAMSON FLOYD
Don't need the likes of Lileks
WHAT'S happening to your newspaper? Why did you choose James Lileks as a columnist for your Friday Commentary page?
When Paxton Davis and Ray Garland were your ``local'' columnists, it meant subscribers could look forward to the Thursday and Friday editions, confident that they'd be informed and enlightened on matters of local and national interest.
Widely divergent as they were in their politics, both were uniformly superior to most of the syndicated columnists who appear on your pages. Now, only Garland remains, and Fridays are given over to Lileks' trashing mode. Here's a writer who believes in nothing except his own - for want of a better term - smirkprose.
Make enough decisions like these, and you'll be surprised at how rapidly a responsible newspaper like yours collapses into tabloid journalism.
JAMES M. COX INDEPENDENCE
Too evil to comprehend
I WOKE up recently, crying for a grief-stricken world and two small children snatched by death. For the life of me, I can't understand why anyone - let alone a mother - would deliberately take someone's life and do such a horrible crime. The Bible says that a mother's love is next to God's love. I don't believe the accused woman was ever truly a mother.
The people of this country are going to hell in a hand basket, and our judicial system is leading the way. If a person takes someone else's life, and it's been proved that it's first-degree or premeditated murder, then let's destroy that person the same way he or she took another person's life.
A person who steals or commits other crimes gets more time than a murderer does. And a murderer shouldn't blame the past, parents or anyone else.
We stick our noses in every war across the world, and we kill millions for their indiscretions, but we won't see that justice is done in our own back yard. If we more liberally applied the death penalty in this country, I guarantee the killing rate would drop, jails wouldn't be running over, and taxpayers' money could go for feeding the homeless and taking care of unwanted children.
I hope this mother gets the death penalty. It's one thing to kill an adult, but to take the life of two little children who didn't ask to be brought into this world is a shame and disgrace before God and man.
I thought to myself: She couldn't have heard her children's screams, but God did.
CARLYN ROBERTSON ROANOKE
by CNB