DATE: Wednesday, February 26, 1997          TAG: 9702260010

SECTION: FRONT                   PAGE: A14  EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Letter 

                                            LENGTH:   96 lines

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR - THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT

LEGISLATION

Parental rights begin, and end, in the home

In the Feb. 11 Daily Break, Elizabeth Simpson argued that the parental-rights amendment and parental-notification legislation are merely ``quick-fix attempts'' to ``force a relationship that ought to be there anyway.'' Unfortunately, Ms. Simpson has profoundly misunderstood the nature of this legislation.

These parental-rights proposals are designed to legislate the relationship between a parent and a child in exactly the same manner in which the First Admendment to the Constitution is designed to legislate the relationship between a journalist and the column she writes. Parental-rights supporters are not ``look(ing) to the government'' to tell them how to raise their children; they are demanding that the government relinquish the powers of decision over the lives of their children that it has surreptitiously usurped.

As Ms. Simpson asserts, ``The real work that needs to be done is not in the General Assembly or the White House. It's in the home.'' But if real work is to be done in the home, then parents must be free to exercise final authority over the upbringing of their children. This is a parent's fundamental right, whether or not our legislature chooses to recognize it.

Joel Thollander

Virginia Beach, Feb.12, 1997

CONSTRUCTION

It's not always the customer who's ripped off

My father and I have owned and operated a small construction company in this area for the past 42 years, and we are often upset when reading about the scams and rip-offs by people in our trade. You know the story: They take the money before the job is complete, never to be heard from again.

On the flip side, I want the public to know about the customer who rips off the builder, especially the small builder whose cash flow depends upon prompt payment by the customer.

We have done work for a lot of nice people in our time, but every once in awhile you get a customer who turns into a living nightmare. I mean the ones who, no matter what you do, are not satisfied and refuse to pay the balance on the contract. You consider legal action but, nine times out of 10, the time and court costs are greater than the money owed. So you pack up your tools, take the loss and hope the next customer is like one of the nice ones you've worked for.

Builder beware!

Sam J. Williams Jr.

Vice president

Williams Brothers Inc.

Portsmouth, Feb. 18, 1997

MEDICINE

Naval Hospital doing a good job

I am writing in response to the Feb. 13 article concerning Portsmouth Naval Hospital. My wife and I recently returned to Hampton Roads following a tour overseas. My wife was six months pregnant at the time and we too heard the ``horror stories'' regarding the conditions at the hospital. All our friends advised us to CHAMPUS out if at all possible. We soon learned CHAMPUS wasn't an option and resigned ourselves to using Portsmouth Naval.

At my wife's first ultrasound appointment we learned there was a medical problem with the baby. Portsmouth Naval closely watched my wife's pregnancy with weekly ultrasounds. Since my daughter was born, the care she has received has been excellent. We have been seen by highly competent doctors who continually call us at home to keep us informed and make themselves available. My wife and I cannot say enough positive things about Portsmouh Naval.

The Navy barely has the money to keep warships and planes in top fighting condition and at sea. It's amazing that Portsmouth Naval Hospital does an overall good job with the limited money it has and the high volume of patients it sees. Don't knock Portsmouth Naval Hospital. It's doing a pretty good job.

Brian Fogarty

Chesapeake, Feb. 18, 1997

MARRIAGE Gay unions are not the real threat

I hear outraged people saying, ``We must not destroy the sanctity of marriage by allowing gays to participate.'' A divorce rate reaching 50 percent suggests that it has already been lost.

I was told by a lawyer that marriage is only a partnership and the only concern in divorce is distribution of assets. The term ``no-fault divorce'' indicates that it is only a property agreement. Oaths taken, before God, of ``till death do us part'' and ``for better or worse'' mean nothing to the courts or the people who take them. When a wife of 20 years decides to just leave and try a new partner, and the courts agree, that tells what marriage has become.

If marriage means nothing more than agreeing to live together, why the concern over who is involved? If ``family values'' are just a cute catch phrase, than maybe what we really need to be concerned with are divorce laws and not marriage laws.

Gays becoming married cannot destroy an institution that has already been destroyed. Politicians who claim to be concerned about family values should reflect that in the laws they make allowing a family to be dissolved. Broken families are the most destructive force in our society today.

David Zinszer

Chesapeake, Feb. 19, 1997

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu