Saving LivesEditor: I believe that all of...


Saving Lives

Editor: I believe that all of us owe a great deal of thanks to Gov. William Donald Schaefer for the courage and fortitude he showed by vetoing the bill which would have permitted speeds up to 65 miles per hour on many of our major roads. By this action, he has saved countless lives already.

It is written in the scriptures that "He who saves just one life, it is the same as if he had saved the entire world."

Irvin I. Silverman.


Baltic Struggle

Editor: Astrid S. Tuminez accuses the Baltic states of human rights violations. Her article is grossly biased.

The people of Lithuania and the other two Baltic nations are known for centuries of tolerance. Lithuania has never abused any of its minorities. During the independence period between the two World Wars, all the minorities enjoyed full freedom to pursue their cultural and religious life. Their rights are not restricted under the present government. Minorities even have democratically elected representatives in the Lithuanian parliament.

Of course, there must be some residency and language requirements for gaining citizenship. This is natural. According to the law passed by the Lithuanian parliament on April 17, the inhabitants of the republic must decide by themselves which citizenship they want, Lithuanian or Soviet. Nobody can have double citizenship.

I think this makes sense. Astrid Tuminez's statement that Lithuanian government negates minority rights of the Polish population is sheer propaganda without any basis in reality.

There are certain elements who are actively engaged in subversive activities to overthrow legitimate governments in the Baltic republics and undermine their efforts to gain independence.

Those elements are instigated and supported by the Soviet government in Moscow which is trying to incite hate between the Baltic states and their minorities. Wouldn't you call such activities another form of human rights abuse by the Soviets?

The Baltic nations' struggle for independence, though very persistent, is highly civilized and democratic. They are fighting using truth and legality, not violence.



Bring Back 'Hon,' Hon

Editor: Michael Olesker was right on when he called for the city of Baltimore to add its special appellation, "Hon," to all its welcoming signs.

What a wonderful gift for these meanest of times. The real thing, offered up by the anonymous grafittists -- gratuitously, without conditions -- for all of us citizens to ponder and enjoy.

How much wasted money has gone into the minting of "professional" advertising slogans, cute and catchy, but shallow and superficial.

"Hon" is a natural. Elegantly phrased and to the point. And what's more, it is Baltimore's alone. (Now there's a name for our nascent National Football League team, "The Baltimore Hons." Or maybe, "Huns.")

Better that the State Highway Administration should have engraved the calligraphic enhancement to our Welcome to Baltimore sign than to have wiped it clean. Would that our public officials be so prompt in their responses to our other social problems.

Bring back our "Hon," Hon.

Harold Adler.

Baltimore. Editor: Mayor Schmoke and the Department of Solid Waste employ absurd logic in their decision to phase-out the services of the hokey men.

Less frequent but more thorough cleanings sound good if you believe that less trash will accumulate during these extended periods of sanitary upkeep.

Trashy gutters in commercial neighborhoods mean the same for the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Yet, the agency plans to curtail service for residential taxpayers in favor of businesses that carelessly dispense disposable wrappings that wind up in the gutters a few blocks away.

Even more absurd is the concept of small sweepers the size of riding mowers. How is the added expense of a mechanical device cheaper than a man and a bucket on wheels? A riding mower-sized device will not sweep the debris that accumulates between the curb and parked cars.

Less cleaning simply means more dirt.

ed L. Pearson. Baltimore. Editor: In March, I wrote a letter on behalf of patients in the Partial Hospitalization Program of Homewood Hospital Center's Department of Psychiatry.

They were trying to gain some sense of power because they felt powerless facing the closing of Homewood and the loss of long-standing comprehensive psychiatric services. They were convinced few people cared what happened to them.

Now, despite the closing of Homewood, patients are convinced that a miracle has occurred, that many more than a few people care about them. They've asked once again that I write, to thank the people associated with Johns Hopkins and Union Memorial hospitals and the members and staff of the Health Resources Planning Commission chaired by Marcia G. Pines for maintaining psychiatric care for them in their community.

zTC Patients know that plans are in place for Union Memorial Hospital to operate the Department of Psychiatry; they see the Partial Hospitalization Program and other outpatient services in full operation; they observe preparation for the impending re-opening of the inpatient unit. Their outlook has changed. They feel welcomed and valued. There is no better therapy.

Ann Kirby. Baltimore.

The writer is a psychiatric counselor in the Partial Hospitalization Program.

Pesticides Praised

Editor: Zoh Hieronimus' May 23 letter was a very carefully crafted but distorted brief for the elimination of pesticides. It selects data from various sources that support its thesis, but ignores later updates. Thus reference is made to a 1982 congressional report that claimed an overwhelming majority of pesticides had not been tested for carcinogenic and birth-defect effects. I am sure this report has been updated, but that would not support the writer's thesis.

The writer also ignores the fact that many of these pesticides are no longer available to the general public and can no longer be used by anyone except a licensed, tested professional.

Also all of those gory scenarios about the effects of the pesticides happen only when the products are grossly misused, as was the case in the chlordane application in your May 19 article.

Finally, feeling that her case was not strong enough, the writer went after the manufacturer of one of the pesticides, Monsanto, claiming the firm is reaping obscene profits. A check of Standard Poor's shows that all of Monsanto's agricultural division earned $327 million, and that includes herbicides, pesticides, and seeds.

It is through the judicious use of these materials that American farmers can repeatedly make up the shortfalls of the rest of the world's agricultural economies.

Pierre G. Kieffer.

Ellicott City.

Copyright © 2019, The Baltimore Sun, a Baltimore Sun Media Group publication | Place an Ad