ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Tuesday, April 23, 1996 TAG: 9604230073
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
TYPE: LETTERS
OH, YES, another article (April 7, ``Park looks to fill budget gaps'') relating the trials and tribulations of Explore Park. For once, I'd like to see a full accounting of salaries earned by those in charge and their immediate underlings over all these years. Would it justify the shifting goals, cloudy vision, careless treatment of resources, corner cutting, pressure for taxpayer funds and layoffs of key but lesser-paid staff?
I'd have more respect for Explore if those at the top had shared the pressures from hard times. Instead, they get paid; then beg for more public money, more donations and more volunteers.
If the project could base its slow progress in solid research and careful documentation, that would be acceptable. But I don't think most people realize what a milk-giving, pork-sucking, egg-laying golden goose this has been for a lucky few. And they don't have to answer to anyone.
E. ANNE PAULL
TROUTVILLE
The doomsayers may be right
REGARDING Bob Fishburn's April 7 book review, ``The State of Humanity'':
In general, I have many differences with the authors of "feel good" environmental books, but I haven't read "The State of Humanity" and cannot comment on specifics.
In his review, however, Fishburn asks a question: "Why does the public apparently insist on believing only the doomsayers?" To that, I'd like to respond.
Whatever written or spoken evidence there may be that we believe the doomsayers, our behavior - as a society - suggests just the opposite. We're expanding in population, buying inefficient four-wheel drive vehicles, building bigger houses and discarding ever more trash per capita.
If, as Fishburn says, "our collective psyche is bent out of shape,'' it's because our actions are out of line with some nagging belief that doomsayers may be right.
DAVID HUNT
ROANOKE
A tax study is already under way
IN HIS letter to the editor (April 7, ``Del. Woodrum's foolish consistency''), Mickey Mixon criticized me for voting against a resolution to study the advisability of reducing or eliminating the personal-property tax. As most of your readers know, local government levies this tax. Mixon goes on to chide me for failing to vote ``just for a study,'' and claims that ``the citizens of Virginia will not have the opportunity to even explore the idea.'' Of course, nothing could be further from the truth.
Here's what happened: In 1995, the General Assembly adopted, with my support, House Joint Resolution 487 which established a blue-ribbon commission to study local-government revenue resources and the responsibilities for local government. The commission was directed to examine all taxes and fees levied by local governments, the equity of each tax and fee assessed, changes needed in the tax structure relative to Virginia's change in economy, and possible alternatives for replacing or consolidating taxes and fees. Naturally, the personal-property tax will be part of this study The comprehensive study directed by this resolution is continuing, and a report hasn't yet been made.
When I voted against the resolution to study just the personal-property tax, I did so because I felt it was duplicative and a waste of money. The issue will be fully examined and reported on under HJR 487, and I saw no need to study it twice.
Yes, I'll continue to be consistent in my opposition to wasteful spending and needless duplication in our state government.
CHIP WOODRUM
Delegate, 16th District
ROANOKE
Police trampled on citizens' rights
I WATCHED television news clips of the California police officers beating the unarmed, unresisting man and woman on the roadside. I believed that the officers were behaving like thugs, not that they were behaving like thugs because the others were Mexicans.
Several days later, ``Larry King Live,'' a television call-in program, was based on this issue. The next day, the early-morning C-Span program had related calls. I could hardly believe the sentiments expressed by the California callers. These were along the lines of: ``These are dirty, noncitizens who deserve anything they get.'' In trying to understand how people could be so apparently mean-spirited, discussions with my fellow students of humanity raised the question: Is this unavoidable if the people of border states are so oppressed by immigrants?
The implications are terrifying. Half a century ago, the German people were downtrodden and oppressed. A charismatic leader led them to national pride, a higher standard of living and glowing, corporate self-esteem. He also pointed out the common enemy.
We have a constitutional government that grants due process to these police officers and the Mexican people. However, we trash our Constitution and are in serious trouble when we allow representatives of the state (police officers) to mete out justice and/or punishment based on their instant decision and their superior physical force.
PATRICIA P. WIDNER
WYTHEVILLE
Blacksburg school deserved credit
LISA Applegate's upbeat article on March 25 ("9 out of 12 Merit Scholars ain't bad") makes only one minor error: The nine Blacksburg High School students aren't merit semifinalists; they're finalists. As the article points out, they've done more than score well on one test.
But guidance counselor Esther Johnson makes a major error in her reply (April 6 letter to the editor, ``The ballyhoo for Blacksburg school was misleading'') by wringing ill will from an article about hard-working students who credit their teachers and school. Johnson could use some guidance.
She claims these students would do just as well anywhere. Unfortunately, the idea that talented students will take care of themselves is a misconception. People assume schools can neglect the fast learners because "they'll succeed anyway." Not true. Many studies show that fast learners are at greater risk for eventual failure than average-paced learners.
Blacksburg High School nurtures all students. The advanced-placement and honors courses are open to all, and regularly overflow into added sections. But teachers and counselors also caution parents to encourage without pushing. Students are given the freedom to switch to other levels.
Accusing Applegate of being "mean-spirited," Johnson refuses to consider that Blacksburg High may be a good learning environment, and instead she rips into the article's lighthearted school comparisons. She then labors at length over absurd comparisons of her own making. Whose spirit is mean?
The simple fact is that nine young people from one school have been free to challenge themselves, have worked diligently, and have emerged not only with merit-finalist recognition but with humble gratitude and new-found confidence. Don't try to tell them they did it all on their own. They know better.
LYNETTE F. MOYER
BLACKSBURG
Darwin's theory has stood time's test
MANY LETTERS to the editor in response to your March 14 editorial ("Teach kids real science") have, unfortunately, favored teaching creationism along with or instead of evolution by means of natural selection in public schools. Most of the letters contain a number of fallacies and misconceptions.
As any paleontologist or biologist would say, evolution is a fact. Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection has withstood the attacks of creationists for nearly 140 years because it's the simplest and best natural explanation for evolution and the observed diversity of life forms. Gaps in the fossil record are easily explained by the concept of punctuated equilibria, a recent modification of Darwin's ideas. For the living creatures I study - human beings - there's an abundant fossil record of transitional forms leading to modern humans.
The term "scientific creationism" is an oxymoron. How can one scientifically test for the existence of God? Promoting scientific creationism illustrates what many surveys have shown: The American public, by and large, doesn't understand the scientific method. If we give creationism equal time in our classrooms, then why not the flat-Earth theory?
If, out of fear, we don't teach our children sound scientific principles like the theory of natural selection, we deny them the chance to ask questions about themselves and the world around them. Reducing biology classes to the rote memorization of scientific names turns an exciting subject into boring drudgery. No wonder kids are turned off by science! By not teaching Darwin's theory, we do a disservice to our children, our nation and our future.
CLIFF BOYD
Associate Professor of Anthropology
Radford University
RINER
LENGTH: Long : 156 linesby CNB