fb pixel

Log In


Reset Password

Here's an idea

So, let me see if I have this right. The Medford police chief wants to tack on &

36;4 a month to our water bills or he will have to cut down on investigations and responding to complaints.

Here's an idea. Maybe if he didn't waste his officers' resources on crosswalk stings, window-tinting stings and sitting in the little radar vans, they might be able to be more productive investigating serious crime and complaints. ' Ted Krempa, Medford

A big mess

I haven't written to the editor of late because I can't decide on the topic. There are so many to choose from.

President selects a Supreme Court nominee on the basis of her religion ' unconstitutional! Tom DeLay arrested!

Bush to veto amendment that would end U.S. policy of torture. Hunger strike at Guantanamo by people detained without charges. President's Cabinet suspected of cover-up in outing CIA agent.

President wants federal troops for local police duty. FEMA is still failing to perform for the hurricane victims; America's disgrace goes on.

— Why did we invade Iraq? Increasing terrorism spawned by Iraq training. Is U.S. energy policy to drill more holes, or invade more countries? Price gouging by oil companies.

Billions of tax dollars missing in Iraq, Louisiana, Mississippi. More no-bid contracts to Halliburton?

Senator Frist insider trading. No plan for bird flu pandemic. Next invasion ' Syria?

Growing inflation. Record deficit spending. U.S. deaths in Iraq approaching 2,000 and 100,000 injured. Inadequate care for returning Iraq veterans.

Shrinking school budgets. Plundering our environment for profit. Bush administration use of Soviet-style propaganda.

Legal immunity for gun makers. Extreme rendition (delegated torture). We've got a big mess to clean up here! ' Joseph T. Suste, Medford

Cat owners responsible

Catty complaints like in Lowell (Mail Tribune, Oct. 19) affect other communities as well. Cat problems must be addressed.

It is not an issue of cat-lover verses cat-hater but rather personal responsibility. Responsible citizens have found ways to keep cats at home. Means to control cats can be found on the Internet, animal shelters, Humane Society, etc.

When cat problems are not addressed by irresponsible cat owners, ordinances should be considered. Cats, like other pets, can be controlled.

Chuck Spies should be commended on his work toward a solution. However, the draft of ordinances does not seem to address the issue of roaming cat-owner accountability.

An ordinance which purports to protect cats by prohibiting property owners from removing roaming cats from the neighborhood and imposing impoundment fees for cats they do capture shifts the burden of responsibility from cat owners to aggrieved property owners. Returning captured cats to their owners without consequences (fines, etc.) does little to engender owner accountability.

Any proposed cat ordinance must recognize cat owners as the primary responsible party. If a captured cat is a stray without a known responsible caregiver, do not punish the responsible property owner for taking it to safe harbor. ' David Christian, Eagle Point

Debate a waste of paper

The age-old debate between atheistic evolutionists and theistic intelligent design theorists has lately been getting a lot of newspaper exposure. To me, it seems that the irresolvable quarrel isn't worth all the ink and paper.

Both camps have seemingly valid points to sound off about, but neither has anything that even vaguely resembles incontrovertible proof.

However, it needs to be said, and printed for all to read, that the intelligent design theorist who also happens to be a creationist-Christian fundamentalist is not a credible debater here. This is so because the Holy Bible, which the Christian-creationist uses as a sort of authoritative guide to the natural sciences is, to say the least, remarkably unreliable.

For example, open any translation of the Bible to Leviticus 11:6 and read the description of the unkosher wild hare. Notice that the furry little critter is mistakenly perceived therein to be a cud-chewing ruminant. To wit, biblical science is sometimes erroneous science.

For many folks the Holy Bible works quite well as a comforting spiritual and religious guide. However, the Christian-creationist who argues that the Bible is also scientifically infallible would do well to rethink his or her position. ' Steven Embry, Medford