DEVELOP OR CONSERVE?
Pasadena Star-News
CA
06/30/2008
There is a great deal of talk about a water shortage, and in the
summer also we are told to save electricity.
We all know that there are too many cars, both moving and parking.
I am still amazed at the amount of building, both residential and
business, in Pasadena. It is obvious that a household like mine cannot
save enough water to supply one new household.
Does our local government have a plan to furnish their new buildings
with water from a new source? Someone must make money from building
these new homes so they could be donating to a fund to clean up
the groundwater.
Please, someone that knows, tell us what the plan is to have more
water, electricity and space for cars.
Crescence Waterhouse
Pasadena
A helpful backgrounder
Here is where you can find the state recall manual:
Here is the Web site for the constitutional amendment against gay
marriage:
The recent court ruling bypassed California constitutional founders,
since gays were in the closet at the time of that writing. It was
clear that marriage then was defined as man and wife, which is the
intent of the Constitution. This is the rational for the recall.
And the following book further defines, the founders’ principles
printed before 1864 "Christian Life and Character of the Civil
Institutions of the U.S." (Book & CD-ROM)
I don’t like using this book as a reference. I would prefer all
churches and legal nonprofit charters revoked in light of the
Rev. Jeremiah Wright and All Saints churches (like the 700 Club),
so that the taxpayers are not advancing any agenda.
Bryan Ranger
Altadena
Voices shouting
In their ad hominem attack on Jason Epstein ("Armenian genocide
still haunts Turkey," June 13), Zanku Armenian and Dickran Tabakian
show off the hateful and intimidating tactics that are unfortunately
commonplace within the Armenian National Committee of America.
The authors ignore the thrust of Epstein’s op-ed ("Armenians need
real, not symbolic help," April 25), which unambiguously urges
Armenian-American activists to do more to support democracy, economic
progress and peace in and around Armenia.
Instead, Armenian and Tabakian do their usual best to shout down
any voices that do not fall in lockstep with their own, nevermind
that most Turkish Americans living in Southern California and many
eminent Western scholars, including Bernard Lewis, Guenter Lewy,
Norman Stone, Andrew Mango, Stanford Shaw and Lieutenant Colonel
Edward Erickson (ret.), believe that the tragic events of 1915 did
not constitute genocide.
Bruce Fein
Resident Scholar
Turkish Coalition of America
New York, N.Y.
Initiative misses mark
"I say, we will have no more marriages; those that are married already,
all but one, shall live; the rest shall keep as they are." – Hamlet,
Act III, Scene 1
Perhaps Hamlet was being a bit too severe, but he was trying to make
a point about the quality of marriage as he saw it about him. Had
he been living in today’s socio-political times, he might have taken
his exhortation even further by imploring all who wish to be married:
"To a nunnery, go!"
The California State Supreme Court recently ruled that marriage between
same sex couples is as legal a process as between any heterosexual
couple. Thus, it ruled that any form of discrimination against
homosexual marriage is unconstitutional in the state.
In response (retaliation?), those who oppose "gay marriage" have
qualified an initiative amendment for the ballot in November that
would enshrine in the state Constitution that only marriage between
one man and one woman would be recognized in California. The issue
will be voted by the people this November.
To all those who oppose same-sex marriage, I ask the following
question: What is "marriage" to you? Is it a legal ceremony or a
religious one? If it is the former, then it must be treated fairly
and equally for all people – irrespective of race, color, creed or
sexual preference. (True, there are some valid arguments against
incest and polygamy, but these are not at issue here and, in fact,
are not addressed by the proposed initiative amendment.)
If, however, marriage is a religious ceremony, then it should be
conducted solely within the religious community and bear no legal
standing whatsoever.
This really is a very simple situation. Either marriage provides a
civil or a religious contract between two people. It truly cannot
be both, because our nation is based upon the separation of church
and state. So, the proposed initiative amendment is focused in the
wrong direction: It either should eliminate marriage entirely as a
legal process, or it should be withdrawn as blatantly discriminatory
against one group of people.
To satisfy those of the religious right who oppose same-sex marriage,
the better solution would be to separate the religious and civil
aspects of marriage permanently and without equivocation for all
people. Let all couples who wish to have a civil union be granted
equal status before the law, and let all couples who wish to have a
religious bond be granted such by the religious institution of their
choice. Two ceremonies: one civil and one religious. Either, in fact,
could be held without the other – with appropriate legal or religious
consequences. In its present form, however, the initiative amendment
only imposes discrimination against a minority, and does it cloaked
in the mantle of religion.
As Hamlet might say: "Think on this when you vote in November."
Ron Streicher
Pasadena
Judge from his street
This letter is in response to your June 17 editorial "Get on board
the trash train," "Our View."
I think anyone who thinks the waste-by-rail project is a good idea
should move to my neighborhood. They should have to listen to the
noise of the facility running.
The people that approve of it should have to fight the excess traffic
from diesel exhaust spewing trucks that are hauling trash to the
station.
We must suffer the health risk associated with living next to a rail
yard, such as cancer, which is quite an unpleasant way to die, or
having their children suffer from asthma or birth defects from the
contaminants. How would you like to live in my area?