ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, April 25, 1996 TAG: 9604250005
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-12 EDITION: METRO
TYPE: LETTERS
I WOULD like to know that I live in a country where I have the freedom of choice to smoke or not to smoke without the government or the people who are against smoking telling me or anyone who chooses to smoke what we can or cannot do. That's freedom?
Most of us have mind enough to stop smoking if we really think it's hurting our health or our family's health. I don't smoke, but that's my choice, as I would hope it would be my choice if I wanted to smoke. That's freedom!
If each person would begin in his or her own home to smoke or not to, and let the rest of the people in our country have the freedom of choice, this would be a better place for all of us to live.
If you don't want your children to smoke, you're the parent. You should be able to control them, if you've done your job as a parent, and have taught them from childhood that you're wiser than they are and that you're in control.
If you haven't done your job, then what do you expect of your children when their friends smoke? They'll smoke also to be one of the crowd.
WANDA E. MARTIN
ROANOKE
Scientific findings can't be discounted
A STRING of letters to the editor since your March 14 editorial (``Teach kids real science'') has amply justified its contents. Letter writers have claimed, among other things, that radioisotope dating is without merit, there are no transitional life forms in the fossil record, that parents would prefer their children be taught ``traditional values'' in science courses, that our nation was founded on belief in a deity and we shouldn't question that belief.
When a vast body of radioisotope data leads to consistent conclusions about the ages of rocks or organic remains, contradictory observations must, of course, be explained. But a scientist familiar with the techniques can point to contamination or other plausible causes. Anyone claiming there are no transitional forms in the fossil record is either ignorant or disingenuous. Among the ``traditional values'' of science are skepticism and a spirit of free inquiry. As for our nation's founders, Thomas Jefferson - the scientist among them - would be amazed at the nonsense now being spoken in his name.
I did breathe a sigh of relief that this country wasn't founded in 1276. Imagine having to hew to the beliefs of those times and teach Ptolemaic astronomy, with the sun orbiting the Earth, etc. To deny what science has learned of the universe since the Middle Ages is to pervert human rationality. But, of course, that was your original point.
DAVID A. WEST
BLACKSBURG
Bishop's concern is a matter of faith
I WONDER if anyone else was struck by the central irony of Samuel C. Palmer Jr's April 16 letter to the editor (``Church needn't fear Freemasonry''). Here we have a man who signs himself "Grand King of the Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons in Virginia" accusing Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Neb., of being an anachronism.
More to the point, Palmer's main contention - that the Catholic church has nothing to fear from Masonry - answers a charge not made by the bishop. The fear expressed by the bishop, and by popes back to Leo XIII, was for the faith of Catholics involved in Masonry. The condescending anti-Catholic tone of the Grand King's letter suggests that the bishop knows whereof he speaks.
JOHN H. LAWLESS JR.
ROANOKE
LENGTH: Medium: 69 linesby CNB