ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Monday, March 25, 1996 TAG: 9603250099
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A4 EDITION: METRO
IT IS amazing to listen to the arguments of many of those opposed to the Roanoke County school-bond referendum. The comments cite the relative needs of one section of the county vs. those of other areas. If these individuals are successful in defeating the bond issue, the quality of education throughout the county (and the reputation of education throughout the region) will be denigrated.
Certainly, as representatives of companies decide where to locate facilities, there are many aspects to consider. One, of course, is the tax base. However, I would contend that far more important than that is the value one receives for his or her tax dollars. Quality education - as exemplified by modern facilities that are conducive to learning, educators who excite students to seek knowledge, and students who honor their schools with their accomplishments during and after their formal training - is probably one of the best uses of our taxes. An attitude of sectionalism, when its intent is to forbid the benefit of one area before another, can in no way advance the greater good of the entire region.
If voters fail to approve the raising of funds now, there will be a profoundly negative effect on the future of Roanoke County and of this valley. Businesses will choose not to locate here. Those citizens who care about their children's education will consider moving to school districts where citizens are more farsighted. Such decisions would obviously result in lower values for houses, and thus a lower tax base to provide any services.
If, on the other hand, voters do approve the referendum, the county will have established an excellent drawing card for businesses and home buyers. Let us not be so blind to the consequences of our votes that we destroy our own future, our children's future and the future of where we live. STAN GLASOFER ROANOKE
Using code words to sell a lifestyle
IN RESPONSE to Laura Scott's Feb. 22 commentary, ``Life would be mighty dull without those who are different'':
A few comments from a different perspective are in order.
Scott is bewildered and dismayed by the new definition ``diversity'' has suddenly taken on. I certainly understand her frustration because I went through the same trauma over the word ``gay.'' She also refers to the assumption that homosexuality can be sold like suntan lotion or cigarettes. It certainly appears that a group of people are trying to do just that, while using the word ``diversity'' instead of ``gay'' or ``homosexuality'' to sell it.
Even lowly cigarette advertisers are honest enough to use the correct title on their billboards. I suppose they could also call their products ``diversity'' since they bring us such a diverse array of pestilence - lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, etc.. None of these, though, even compares to AIDS, courtesy of the diversity being sold by the group Scott refers to. She also states that a billboard advertising cigarettes isn't going to cause her to start smoking. Really? Then why all the fuss about cigarette advertising influencing young people to smoke?
Surely, we need a diverse society and a gay one. It's only when these words are used as a code for homosexuality that they take on a totally different meaning. It's not the word ``diversity'' that infuriates straight people, but the devious methods some use to package and sell homosexuality. RAYMOND A. SIMMONS ROANOKE
Hunters aren't cruel to animals
REGARDING D.A. Gooch's Feb. 21 letter to the editor, ``Cruelty to animals is unacceptable'':
I agree that cruelty to animals is unacceptable, but it's also unacceptable for people to judge sportsmen in that manner. I'm a sportsman and enjoy the outdoors for what the good Lord has created, not for just the taking of an animal.
There's no difference in taking an animal while hunting or fishing and taking it home to be used as a meal, and killing a poor innocent cow to be used as hamburger or steak. The Lord didn't intend for us to eat only vegetables. WILLIAM E. HICKS JR. GOODVIEW
LENGTH: Medium: 77 linesby CNB