Letters to the Editor

Few things I've ever read have brought me to tears but the essay (P-I, Sunday) written by Pastor Anthony B. Robinson, "The Gay Divide," had me welling up throughout the article.

Thank you, Pastor Robinson, for writing such a candid piece. Thank you for pointing out that Jesus Christ was not exclusive but "inclusive" and for giving example that gays and lesbians follow the teachings of Christ, too. Thank you for your inclusive nature and not automatically categorizing gays and lesbians as morally bankrupt when, in fact, many gays and lesbians have strong morals and family values.

As humans we sin and those who "follow" go back for forgiveness. This includes gays, lesbians and heterosexuals.

Jeffrey J. Wagner
Walla Walla

GAMBLING

Casinos need not be far away from people

Most would agree many things are OK in moderation and the vast majority (98 percent) of us follow this rule. Alcohol, OK in moderation, gambling OK in moderation, and now a report states that seniors may benefit from gambling, in moderation.

The premise of opponents of Initiative 892 is absolutely ridiculous. It's acceptable for gamblers to drive 10 minutes to a tribal casino and if you can't drive it's OK to send a bus to pick you up but heaven forbid if the same person can walk five minutes to a local taxpaying businesses and play the exact same machine.

Opponents and front groups for the tribal casinos focus on the few who may have problems. I would argue that none of these supposed unbiased groups has ever complained about the single opening or expansion of a tribal casino. Think about it, if you're really against gambling, isn't all gambling bad?

The fact is, gambling's enjoyed by many. Rather than go to a movie or the opera they choose to spend their entertainment dollar in a way that brings them enjoyment. We don't treat people who enjoy a drink or two as if they're alcoholics but opponents of Initiative 892 preach that because 2 or 3 out of 100 people may have a problem the other 98 percent should in effect be penalized, treated as potential alcoholics, denied what we wish to do and where we wish to do it.

Dave Wilkinson
Renton

STREETCAR

Before building a new line, preserve the existing Benson line

I find it appalling that the city of Seattle is planning to build a new streetcar line, while the present one, the George Benson Waterfront Streetcar, is threatened with closure by King County Metro. It announced last Wednesday that the maintenance facility it has will be torn down for the Seattle Art Museum Sculpture Garden Parking June 2005. Service will end in February 2005 unless it builds a new storage and maintenance building by then.

The city of Seattle built the Waterfront Streetcar with a Local Improvement District tax on the waterfront businesses in the early 1980s and then gave it to Metro to operate.

What guarantee do we have that the same will not happen to South Lake Union if the Waterfront Streetcar closes in five months? What about this expansion plan for the waterfront line? How can that happen if it is closed? I'm sure that the merchants on the waterfront and in Chinatown will be greatly impacted just as the merchants at Westlake Center are with the closing of the Seattle Center Monorail. Maybe we should save and keep running one streetcar line first before trying to plan to build a new one.

Doug Thomson
Seattle

SEATTLE MONORAIL

Seattle already made its decision, now make it a final decision

If Seattle can never make a final decision, nobody will want to do business here.

The monorail was decided. Let's roll.

Peter Haley
Seattle

Propaganda won't fix what's wrong with Seattle Monorail Project

The Seattle Monorail Project's Director of Public Outreach (read Propaganda Director) claims that the Seattle Monorail Project is "all about the people." The Propaganda Director claims that this idea of a monorail is the people's 21st century response to the gridlock choking our streets. The monorail project gained power by virtue of 877 votes, in an off-year election with very low voter turnout. The Seattle Monorail Project is not about the people at all. It is about a small group of monorail evangelists who pay themselves very well to ramrod their arbitrary choice of a monorail upon this city.

If the Seattle Monorail Project is so certain that the people of Seattle think that the monorail will ease gridlock, why has it spent at least $300,000 of our car-license tabs on lawyers' fees to prevent our Initiative 83 from getting on the ballot? Why is it so afraid of another vote? Perhaps it is because the Seattle Monorail Project well knows that the people have figured out that the monorail is a folly and a boondoggle, and will not remove cars from our roads. By the SMP's own figures, the monorail will remove less than 1 percent of passenger car trips from our streets, and from the streets of Ballard and West Seattle. When was the last time you heard the KIRO morning news report traffic jams on Fauntleroy Way? Or 15th Avenue West?

Liv S. Finne
Co-Chairman,
Monorail Recall Committee
Seattle

IRAQ WAR

Former President Bush makes strong case against this conflict

I think former President Bush makes a compelling argument in his book, "A World Transformed," as to why the road we have taken in Iraq is not the road best traveled:

"Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different -- and perhaps barren -- outcome."

I couldn't agree with George H.W. Bush more. Too bad his son doesn't see things the same way.

Kerry Ourada
Lake Forest Park

Stand quiet on the war front? No! It's time for outrage

Let me get this straight. A P-I editorial says it's "essential to stop and stand quietly beside this milepost" of 1,000 dead Americans in Iraq?

Are you insane?

The reason there are 1,000 dead Americans in Iraq is because this entire nation has stood by quietly for the last two years, while George Bush and his cadre of professional liars have shipped our sons, daughters, fathers and mothers off to fight a bogus war that was concocted the day after Inauguration Day! You want us to be good little 1933 Germans, and not make a fuss. You want us to put up with the daily death tolls and the appeasers masquerading as journalists on CNN and NBC, or the gung-ho, jingoistic war cheerleaders on Fox.

Not me. Not this time. Not today, not ever.

It's not time for standing by quietly. It's well past the time for outrage.

It's time for the people who truly value the freedom and liberty America used to stand for to rise up and put a stop to this megalomania. But where's the outrage? Where are the cries of anguished families whose loved ones have returned in pine boxes shrouded with secrecy?

Certainly not in the P-I. No, you'd rather just have us shut up and let this national tragedy slide by. What are you going to write when the next 1,000 Americans are killed over there? What's Donald Rumsfeld going to say then? "Well, you know, that's still less than we lost on 9/11."

One more time for the record: Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Even Bush finally admitted it.

So how is the P-I quietly marking the current death toll of nearly 12,000 Iraqi civilians?

George Orwell wrote in 1945, "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." It would appear the news media in this country, and the P-I in particular, have gone deaf.

Jef Jaisun
Seattle

Reality is missing from war when numbers of dead appall

Once again, the Bush administration has declared war on reality. A thousand deaths: The number should appall. But Rumsfeld calls it "relatively small."

Cody Walker
Seattle

Bush avoided military obligations -- it should matter more to voters

A recent re-examination of George Bush's military records show that he fell "well short of meeting his military obligations."

Even retired Lt. Col. Albert Lloyd, Jr., a former Texas Air National Guard personnel chief who had previously vouched for Bush's record, admitted that Bush walked away from his obligation to join a Reserve unit in the Boston area after moving to Cambridge. Bush didn't meet his commitments for 6 to 9 months nor did he face any punishment. However, Lloyd said it wasn't fair to single Bush out for criticism since "there were hundreds of guys like him who did the same thing."

OK, maybe he's not the only rich guy who used family connections and then avoided his military obligations, but he is the only one who is now running for president.

You would think this would matter more to American vets than the fact that John Kerry opposed a war that 30 years later virtually no one can defend as being a just cause.

John Tuttle
Seattle

Add P-I Opinion headlines to