ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, May 16, 1996 TAG: 9605160097
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-12 EDITION: METRO
TYPE: LETTERS
IN HIS May 4 letter to the editor, ``Fostering a climate for violence,'' Edward Lynch suggests that legalized abortion is to blame for the attempted murder of a California infant by a 6-year-old boy.
He seems to believe that pro-choice supporters and President Clinton ``created a climate in which unspeakable acts become acceptable.''
From all accounts this reader has seen, that incident was a tragic act committed by an incorrigible child who is most likely profoundly disturbed. Lynch's exploitation of this situation is deplorable, and his logic is defective. How does he presume that a child of that age has come to reason that attempted murder of an infant is justified by legalized abortion in this country?
According to a May 6 news article in this newspaper, ``Crime rate drops,'' the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual crime report shows that ``serious crime fell for the fourth year in a row in 1995, with murder dropping a remarkable 8 percent - the third sharpest one-year decline in more than 30 years.'' If Lynch were correct in his reasoning, the existence of legalized abortion should have caused an increase in violent crime during the referenced time period.
People disagree as to whether abortion should remain legal. Most agree, however, that this society needs to get to work on education that would lead to preventing unwanted pregnancies. Until you have made an effort in that arena, you haven't done justice to this issue.
ANN RICHARDSON
ROANOKE
Life comes from the spirit, not flesh
AFTER READING her April 20 letter to the editor (``Creationism isn't science, so don't teach it as such"), I realized that Charlene M. Lutes, a retired biology professor at Radford College, is like many others in the science profession: She fears more than anything that teaching evolution is quickly becoming an integral part of the academic fossil record. She said it best herself: "To require understanding of ideas is a valid objective of education; to require acceptance would be indoctrination, not education."
Of the 1.5 million men and women now serving time in American prisons, how many do you imagine have picked up a copy of Darwin's "Origins of the Species," and turned their life around because of what they read and all the experiences in thought and memory that came from that reading? There's a reason why evolution proves itself unacceptable to most and acceptable to only a few. It omits reconciliation, forgiveness and agreement as instruments of the problem-solving technique of humanity.
The greater part of man knows that life comes from the spirit, not the flesh. It's the spirit that gives life. The body is of no account when it comes to life. Evolution attempts to divide that which is natural from that which is supernatural. Its success shows up in 30 million abortions, a high prison population and a 50 percent divorce rate. These "spectacular demonstrations" of the consequences of man thinking himself but an animal by accepting evolution's expectations have been on the increase since the mid-'60s.
MARSHALL TACKETT
BUCHANAN
No second try for defeated bonds
ED KOHINKE'S commentary (April 22, ``Vote again on the school bond issue'') wasn't very statesmanlike. He doesn't understand a voter's right - or mind-set.
True, there was a poor turnout in Roanoke County when the bond referendum was presented to the voters. But to have a second try on this school bond is sheer folly. Common sense will tell you that it would be defeated again. Why? Voters who didn't show up to vote the first time either didn't care or would have voted to defeat it.
People voting against it the first round would still vote against it, as well as others who didn't show up the first time. The outcome would be the same - most against it!
This vote shouldn't be decided by the representatives. The good people of Roanoke County will make sure of that!
NICK BORSELLA
ROANOKE
Many will miss `Mr. Fitness'
WITH REFERENCE to the May 9 article, ``Farewell, Mr. Fitness,'' by Robert Freis:
It was an excellent tribute to Artie Levin. I was so saddened to read of his death.
I had been a faithful follower, and missed Levin's programs in recent years. He was quite a guy, and always had that great smile.
I met him several times, and it was a privilege talking to him. I, too, felt he was indestructible. He will be missed.
PEGGY ALLEN
RADFORD
A tax adjustment is the better answer
CLAUDE LEWIS' May 3 commentary (``As the politicians posture, the working poor struggle'') states, ``Comparatively few American workers would directly benefit from the pay increase, and only a few industries such as restaurants and some apparel manufacturers would be affected by the change.''
I believe a minimum-wage increase would affect every business that has hourly workers because an increase at the low end of the pay scale quickly moves up to also become an increase at the top of the pay scale. This is why labor unions support the proposal.
Adjustment in tax rates is a better way to give these people increased purchasing power.
ROBERT McGEORGE
ROANOKE
Politicians fear the pro-Israel lobby
IN RESPONSE to Charles F. Roberts' May 6 letter to the editor, ``Stop aiding Israel's barbaric tactics'':
I agree. How can a debtor nation like the United States afford to prop up a country such as Israel - a so-called ally - to the tune of $3 billion to $5 billion in aid every year, plus every weapon system our country develops? Our so-called ally, if not granted those weapon systems, will resort to any means to procure them (i.e., the Pollard spy case).
Today, we do not have any statesmen in the Washington establishment - only politicians who live in fear of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Washington's principal pro-Israel lobby. We talk about shortfalls in funding for Social Security and Medicare, but no one in the Republican Party or Democratic Party - fearing retaliation from the pro-Israel lobby - will address the issue of foreign aid.
BEN L. ROSSELL
BLUE RIDGE
Canada's crisis tied to U.S. proximity
VISITING Southwest Virginia recently, I read the April 10 commentary by Mark Schwartz on Canada's national identity crisis (``Multiculturalism is tearing Canada's loose fabric'').
He was identified as a Canadian living in Washington. It's a shame he's forgotten his Canadian history or he would recall that Canada's multiculturalism policy wasn't initiated in 1971 by then-prime minister Pierre Trudeau. Its roots can be traced to the beginning of the 20th century and then-prime minister Wilfrid Laurier's immigration policies. Multiculturalism or the ``cultural mosaic'' may have become a state policy under Trudeau. But Schwartz surely recognizes that laws and policies do not create a new reality - they reflect reality that has existed for some time.
As for other causes of our ``wasting national identity,'' Schwartz is equally wrongheaded. Quebec's ``burgeoning sovereignty movement'' began on the Plains of Abraham, before the FLQ crisis of the early '70s, which saw the Front de la Liberation du Quebec kidnap a diplomat and murder a provincial Cabinet minister. As for those ``equally troubling, native Indian independence movements,'' they began when Europeans appropriated their land and reneged on promises to give it back.
While some multicultural, multilingual countries have split (notably, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia), others have remained united (e.g., Switzerland). What happens in Canada remains to be seen, but its national identity or lack of it, and the difficulty of establishing or consolidating it, is recognized by those of us north of the border as primarily due to our proximity to the United States, a much larger, largely English-speaking country.
TERRY MURRAY
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA
LENGTH: Long : 152 linesby CNB