ROANOKE TIMES

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, April 09, 1995                   TAG: 9504140002
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: G-2   EDITION: METRO  
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Long


SMOKERS CAN SHOW MORE COURTESY

I DON'T want government running my life, but I believe smokers are asking for government intervention with their bad manners.

In the beauty shop recently, a woman seated under the dryer lit up her second cigarette while watching me try to keep my nose and mouth covered with my handkerchief. My husband had to take me to a clinic two days later because I had been unable to stop coughing. During that time, I wondered how long it had been since anyone had asked me before lighting up if I minded if they smoked, or if the smoke would bother me. I couldn't even remember one time in the past several years.

More and more shops are posting ``No Smoking'' signs, but that wouldn't be necessary if more smokers merely used common courtesy. It's not simply a matter of disliking smoke - more and more people are becoming allergic to it. It doesn't seem too much to ask to be allowed to have my hair done or enjoy a ball game without becoming sick.

MRS. ALAN L. RHODES

ROANOKE

A cartoon's underlying message

YOUR March 13 editorial page cartoon, showing Republicans perched atop a huge uterus, was a good picture of just how empty the pro-choice position is. The abortion debate isn't about an empty reproductive organ, but about the living human being who is conceived and develops within that uterus.

When will the pro-choice apologists stop hiding behind the smoke screen of women's-rights rhetoric and start dealing honestly with the destruction of innocent human life that abortion causes?

BOBBY AND SUSAN DOBYNS

ROANOKE

Spread the word: Roanoke's great!

WE HAVE so much going for us that we should tell the world what a great place Roanoke is to live. There are positive things that we can tell others about to get tourists and dollars here, instead of being negative and bickering about a statue.

Interstate 81, the gateway to the Roanoke Valley, surrounded by the beautiful Blue Ridge Mountains, a friendly city, the Star City. Did you know that Mill Mountain Zoo is right next to the star? The zoo is open daily, except for Christmas. The concession stand opens in April, where there is an array of good wholesome food.

Visitors are in store for the view atop Mill Mountain. Did you know that it's always so cool, refreshing and relaxing up there?

Tell all what a great place Roanoke is - a terrific place to retire to. We have an educational center, a sports complex and so many top-notch sporting events here. A new baseball stadium will soon be completed where you can watch baseball in your own backyard. Did you know that for the past 10 years the Church of God of Anderson, Ind., has had its softball tournament in our valley during the Labor Day weekend? Last year, there were more than 50 teams from 14 states that spent more than $1 million.

We're a travel center. We have lakes for boating, swimming and fishing, and hiking and bike trails.

Roanoke has so much to offer to the tourist trade. I'm so proud to tell others that I live in this great city. Do you? Spread the word.

FRANK A. WALLACE

ROANOKE

Army career didn't pay big money

REGARDING Ruth G. Cunningham's March 11 letter ``Federal retirees' issue still nettles'':

My husband retired from the Army, and never made big money. During his 20 years in the military, he spent six years in Germany, three years each in Georgia and Texas, one year each in Korea, Vietnam and Oklahoma, and five years in Virginia. And I was with him in the places where I was allowed to go. Little to none of his pay was spent in Virginia, except for the time he was stationed in the state and his war time in Vietnam. He was required to pay state taxes on his earnings since he was a legal resident of Virginia, even though he was several hundred miles away.

Cunningham mentions ``salaries far above most working people.'' In 1960, my husband averaged $27.72 a week; in 1968, $85.59 a week; and in 1970, $119.62 a week. And all of this big money was before state or federal taxes were taken out. Wow, those were really big wages to be raising a family on and paying taxes on, and seldom spending a dime in the state for years at at time! What was her average pay during those years?

I'm sorry she's upset that my husband is getting a small tax refund. But I think it was just as ``rotten'' (her word) that he was sent to war to keep the freedom for the likes of her, so I suppose she could say we're even in our thinking. Oh, please don't be afraid for the state. What little he gets back won't bankrupt Virginia, rest assured.

DONNA A. GRAY

BUCHANAN

Behavior changes may be required

AS A parent, I applaud the recommendation of abstinence pertaining to sexual matters made by chairman of the Roanoke County School Board, Frank Thomas, and the director of the AIDS Council of Western Virginia, Carol Webb. However, I would go one step further and ask: Abstinence from what exactly? Are we referring to the act of coitus? All activities of a sexual nature, or maybe activities that lead to activities of a sexual nature?

Some believe it's unrealistic to expect teen-agers to abstain from sexual intercourse. One such person is a teen-age mother who recently said on television, ``You just can't help having sex!'' Why? Is someone forcing her? Is she a victim of some uncontrollable urge? Are her hormones more demanding than hormones of those who abstain?

Abstinence can and does work, but only if individuals are willing to make some changes in lifestyle choices. These changes must be made before he or she gets into situations where they ``just can't help having sex.'' To have self-control that leads to abstinence, a person must change the behavior that leads to the behavior he or she is trying to avoid.

In behavior-modification therapy, a person is taught to look for antecedents or cues, which are those activities that precede the behavior (in this case, the activities that precede the activities that directly lead to coitus) and make it more likely to occur. When couples engage in foreplay, then it's quite likely that they won't be able to abstain from completing the act. Spending hours together away from anyone else is another antecedent, and so is spending the night together. And this doesn't even count situations where alcohol or other drugs are involved.

Along with antecedents and behaviors come consequences of the behavior(s). This could mean anything from an unwanted, unplanned pregnancy to a sexually transmitted disease.

Yes, abstinence can and will work for anybody (and not just teen-agers) as long as the person is willing to avoid the behavior that leads to the behavior.

PATRICIA D. DEEL

CLOVERDALE

No return to prescientific ages

JUSTIN Askins' cynical essay (March 6 commentary, ``Science, it seems, is not an exact science'') on scientific knowledge and the origins of the universe veils a creationist view of ``science as a threat'' and demonstrates a common layman's misunderstanding of science and its significance.

The scientific method is nothing more mysterious than the meticulous observation and recordation of empirical data for contribution to our existing framework of knowledge as comprised of previously assembled data. It should come as no surprise to Askins that when new data don't mesh with the existing framework, the framework is revised to accommodate the data as consistently as possible. Science is valuable only to the extent that it's willing to recognize our incomplete and imperfect understanding of the world around us and pursue those missing pieces without bias.

Askins and the rest of us enjoy the attendant technological benefits of that pursuit on a daily basis, and one quick look around confirms that few people are willing to step back into a lifestyle of the prescientific Middle Ages, regardless of whether they hold a creationist belief in the origins of the universe.

He notes apparent gaps and inconsistencies in the present body of scientific knowledge, and then perversely concludes that ``we must begin to view scientists as little more than entertainers ... and decide if the destructive results of their tricks are worth having.'' I suspect that Askins' daily behavior and role as a Radford associate professor belies his cynical view of the pursuit of knowledge, scientific or otherwise.

R. BRUCE FICKLEY

ROANOKE



 by CNB