www.roanoke.com

Roanoke would do better to open the public pools

Re: the editorial April 19 commending Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke city manager for a job well done in crafting the recent budget ("A remarkable effort for Roanoke"):

"What council accomplished -- with competent guidance from city managers -- is truly remarkable."

However, I am distressed at the possibility of closing our two public swimming pools for this summer. My concern goes back 40 years, when only privileged children who belonged to private pools got the chance to swim in the summer. Friends and I who fixed breakfast for children at the South East Community Center (now the Presbyterian Community Center) used to wonder what we would do with the children during those long, hot summer days. We were so happy and proud when Roanoke built the two pools in Fallon and Washington parks.

I don't know how council can find the money to keep the pools open this summer. If it were my decision, I would sell a few trolleys or even raise a few taxes. Wherever the money can be found, I'm praying that all children in the Roanoke Valley can go swimming this summer.

The government is out of touch

Our government leaders are extremists. They are extremely arrogant. They are extremely ignorant. They are extremely dangerous. They are extremely out of touch with their constituents.

But I guess I'm an extremist too. I extremely hope that we get back to the government of and by we, the people, and I pray to God that we get there soon.

Taxes help to pay for much we hold dear

Re: "Income taxes are unconstitutional," April 22 letter by Terry Franklin:

While the 16th Amendment may be dubious in nature, the Constitution that Franklin so proudly claims to abide by is not questionable.

His verbiage and tact are those of a well-read, perhaps highly educated fellow. Perhaps he attended some posh New England private academy or one of the many in the lovely South, but good money -- as coined and printed by this government -- would bet that he attended public schools at some time.

Point being, he has enjoyed some of the fruits of taxation.

If he is a self-taught man, I hope he is not driving on public roads or using any of the many public services that government provides to us.

We live in a country with almost limitless opportunities and protected freedoms. If the government that allows me to live and die free requires a tax to help in providing those freedoms to me, so be it. And to think he would place the likes of James Madison and Benjamin Franklin in the same company as Marx and Hitler -- he would most likely be hunted down in a society such as theirs for his opinions.

Mayberry isn't gone, or even far away

Re: "Cornershot," April 25 Extra section:

Perhaps Rascal Flatts was singing about our very own Mayberry. Just a couple of miles up Virginia 122 from Hales Ford Bridge, it has the friendly neighbors, front porches and all the other features Flatts was singing about.

We must be ahead of our time, or at least our standard-feature front porches and friendly neighbors are. We'll have a Cherry Coke waiting for you if you want to check us out.

For our health's sake, let's stop shaking

The threat of a worldwide epidemic of swine influenza should be the time for mankind to abandon the stupid habit of shaking hands. Hands are a primary route to passage of germs and viruses from person to person. Yet we all do it: doctors, dentists, politicians, friends meeting, strangers being introduced, deal makers.

At church, parishioners join hands and, as they depart, they all shake hands with the minister. The churchgoers may leave with a mix of 200 or so germ deposits as they head for their after-church dine-outs.

Let's immediately stop handshaking and turn to safer alternatives, such as embracing in a gentle hug, nodding heads, bowing slightly from the waist and saluting. The military uses the latter but often messes up with follow-on handshakes.

At festive occasions, a comely woman blessed with beautiful legs might raise her skirt slightly as she curtsies. My wife still qualifies, but at 81 she might topple over.

Wind energy advocates care about wildlife

I don't object to Laurie Berman's opposition to the wind energy facility in Highland County ("Highland wind project threatens birds, bats," April 26 letter). She and her organization have every right to have a say in how development proceeds in their neighborhood.

But I object strongly to her characterization of wind energy advocates as either "those who stand to benefit financially" or environmentalists who have not "studied the impacts in detail or questioned the industry propaganda."

Most wind energy supporters are concerned about wildlife impacts, and many have studied these issues extensively. We need to look at the problem on a larger scale than just a single site.

Conventional power plants have destroyed untold millions of aquatic creatures through alteration and destruction of streams. Pollution from coal-fired power plants fouls our air and is unequivocally linked to human respiratory disease and premature deaths. Thousands of species are at risk from the creeping devastation of global warming.

We need to find solutions to these problems, and wind energy will be one of them, along with efficiency and conservation. Impugning wind energy proponents does not add value to the process.

MARK McCLAIN

Director Roanoke Valley Cool Cities Coalition

Flag was lowered for last Bedford Boy

In response to "Last Bedford Boy deserved the honor" (April 27 letter) by Don Bollas of Moneta, I think it is important to note that the American flag at the National D-Day Memorial was indeed lowered to honor D-Day veteran Ray Nance on April 22, the date he was laid to rest.

He was not only an inspiration to us all, but a dear friend who will be sorely missed. His presence will always be a part of the memorial, and we were honored to have known him.

Criticisms go beyond gay marriage

Once again, Gerald McDermott rants against gay marriage ("Marriage isn't for everyone," April 26 commentary), and I believe even those who agree with his position on this issue ought to be troubled by his narrow definition of the current institution.

McDermott implies a lesser status to married couples who, by choice or circumstance, remain childless. If, as McDermott asserts, the primary purpose of marriage is procreation, then all other reasons people decide to marry are entirely secondary and therefore of less merit. This is an insult to widowed people who remarry late in life simply for love and companionship. It is a smack in the face to younger, infertile couples who choose not to adopt or who cannot do so.

Further arguing that the optimum environment for children is one in which they live with their married, biological parents, McDermott gives only a mere nod in favor of adoptive parents. What a slight this thinking is to every couple who provides a stable, loving home to their adopted children.

As an ordained clergyman and professor of religion, McDermott should reread his Bible to see that even Jesus was raised by an adoptive father, Joseph.