Letters for September 1, 2005

Yeah, we get it
Re “The power of Pride,” (Cover story, Aug. 18):

It is vulgar for individuals to wear their sexuality, religion, and politics on their sleeves. Why do homosexuals continually feel a need to rub it in my face?

John Fisher

Picture George and Laura
Re “The power of Pride,” (Cover story, Aug. 18):

I’m sure that you’re enjoying all the attention your Gay Pride article has garnered.

First let me say that I am not part of the “faux-Christian right,” although I can be characterized as “conservative.”

I am not “homophobic” even though I believe men having intercourse with other men is disgusting and unhealthy. Jacobowitz-Cain’s statement that they are “normal” is patently ridiculous. If you believe that two men having sex is “normal,” then you clearly didn’t pay attention in biology class. No amount of trendy catering to the gay agenda is going to change that. Spare us the old “it’s not a choice; it’s genetic” line because the bottom line is that we humans are not made to vent our lust on others of the same sex.

If you really think it is normal, take a moment to assemble a mental picture of what those two guys do to each other in their bedroom. Does that mental picture appear normal to you? If it does, then I believe you must have some deviant issues of your own.

I object to your referring to the male couple as being “married” and one of them being a “husband.” There is no legal marriage there.

Your reference to them being “married” for “double the average length of a heterosexual marriage” is a cheap shot.

Lastly, your editorial statement, referring to anyone who writes complaints about the article, that you will “out their homophobia on the letters page” is a threat that seems beneath a paper that claims to be supportive of [people’s rights to have] different views.

Tom Silva

You’re welcome
Re “The power of Pride,” (Cover story, Aug. 18):

Thank you, thank you, thank you! God bless all of those featured in “The power of Pride.” They have done Reno a favor by putting their names and faces to our diverse community. We are all better for it.

I especially loved seeing Paul Cain and Kurt Jacobowitz-Cain on the cover. It reminded me that true love—gay or straight—is always a beautiful sight to behold.

Annie Uccelli

The pot calls the kettle
Mr. Lafferty, your one-sided understanding of the world would be amusing if it weren’t so tragically hypocritical. Your column decries the FCNA for releasing a “fatwa” against Islamic extremism because they failed to define the words “innocent” and “civilians” when denouncing terrorist acts.

The FCNA may not have been quick to define “innocent” or “civilian,” but has the Bush administration been quick to define “enemy combatant,” “terrorist” or even “torture"? White House officials always seem to skirt the exact definition of these words.

As for the rampant examples of when Muslim extremists attack, let’s see if you can answer these questions: Who funded “Air America” to ship heroin in and out of Vietnam to fund illegal arms deals during the war? Who created a propaganda campaign, and then failing that funded and planned a coup to assassinate a president and thousands of supporters in Chile in 1970-73? Who bombed medicine factories and water supplies in the Middle East, ending thousands of innocent lives as part of a military campaign during Desert Storm? Who carpet-bombed fleeing troops as they followed American orders to retreat from Kuwait (days before the deadline to leave)? The list goes on and on, Mr. Lafferty. (If you’re not clear on the answer, it’s “conservative presidents.")

I’m not trying to justify the actions of terrorists. Anyone who commits acts of terrorism should be stopped. But don’t think that it’s only Muslims who commit brutal atrocities in the name of their causes, whether freedom, religion or political goals.

Daniel Sharpe

Vote incumbents out
Just saw in the news that President Bush signed off on the so-called highway-improvement bill, which passed through Congress with only four nay votes. I have a couple of questions:

First, how can our government pass such a pork-heavy bill when the national debt is so embarrassingly high, which conceivably could take several generations to get the country back in the black?

Second, our “representatives” exercising the Congressional vote to pass this lump of dung into existence have no idea of how little they really know about their constituency. Who benefits most from this ridiculous bill?

This bill was designed to line the pockets of people who have shown prowess when it comes to spending money that does not belong to them. Why do we keep these people in Washington, D.C.? These people are dinosaurs who haven’t got the message that they are extinct. We, as a nation, must vote out incumbents. We, as a nation, can’t maintain this status quo for much longer.

Karl G. Matsunaga