Sex in the military
Cecelia L. Bass (letter, Dec. 1) unintentionally, I believe, reinforced a belief that has existed among most of the peoples of the world since the beginning of civilization.
When one has something to hide because it is not generally considered acceptable behavior (such as having a mistress or ++ being homosexual), it is best left hidden. Sexual activity should have remained a private matter between consenting adults and God.
It is natural that homosexuals want to be considered normal, and they are, except sexually. Unless they are married or involved in a similar relationship, it is not natural to expect sexual opposites to share sleeping quarters or bathing facilities. In such situations, males and females have been separated since childhood, and the only reason for that separation is that they are sexual opposites.
When one is not attracted to the opposite sex but to his or her own sex, it upsets not only the entire system of nature, but the social system in particular. Only if he or she actually becomes the opposite sex does it appear to be righted.
Every individual has the right to expect the separation of sexual opposites in the aforementioned ways. But if open homosexuals are allowed to join the military, such separation would not be possible.
How any heterosexual, homosexual or president-elect can ignore these facts is beyond my understanding. The answer appears to be to stay "in the closet" or stay out of the military.
Let's give new administration a chance
There are many people who are bitter about the results of the recent local and national election. But the time for bitterness is past.
The election was held, the people spoke -- and all of us know the results.
There has never been and will never be a time when people
won't have differences of opinion on almost any public issue in this country.
We hold elections after hearing much political rhetoric, and when it is all over, each of us continues with our life as best we can, regardless of our circumstances.
Our country is large and our population is diverse. We have all colors, creeds and races. The American people have survived for over 200 years because we swallow our differences and get on with the job of trying to make this country better by our own individual effort.
That is why we must throw our support to the new administration in Washington and give it a chance.
R. M. McLaughlin
Help the poor at home
We see the emaciated people of Somalia on TV and ask how a situation like that could occur for so long before someone went to the rescue.
Another situation has also been going on for a long time, in every state, and one can't help asking how long we will allow it before we really start to do something about it. That problem is the needy.
We don't see them on TV but they are there, in your community and mine. They come in all colors, they have the same needs, they have the same thing in common. They have fallen through the crack of a system that is designed to keep them poor.
They feel unimportant and ashamed of their deplorable living conditions. They've lost their self-esteem, and most of all, they've lost hope. Many suffer in silence -- too ashamed to let anyone know of their condition.
This should not happen in America. We can help.
I know that times are hard. Many, including myself, have been laid-off from jobs, but I believe there is still a way to help the needy.
There's a group of friends, and we gather each evening for coffee. One announced that she had "adopted" a family for Thanksgiving and Christmas. She explained that she was given the name of a needy family by Social Services.
Another friend suggested that our "doughnut gang" adopt a family also. Immediately everyone reached in their pocket for money, and just that quickly and painlessly a family had a nice Thanksgiving dinner and will have a beautiful Christmas.
Others could do this too. Organize in groups at work, bowling league, class rooms or neighborhoods. It costs so little for each and yet it helps so much, and you will feel great.
Best of all, you won't have to worry whether the money went where you wanted, because your group will be in charge.
Each of us gave $5. None missed such a small amount. My thoughts are that we could do this once a month, and what a difference we could make in someone's life.
Enough with this onslaught of put-downs against country music already! Kevin Cowherd's column, "Melancholy Melodies" (Dec. 4), zeroed in on only one facet.
It's not all just "Achy-Breaky Heart," "Thunder Roll," or "It Wasn't God Who Made Honky-Tonk Angels." Don't forget Tom T. Hall's "I Love," Crystal Gayle's "Long and Lasting Love," Randy Travis's "Point of Light," and "Love Can Build a Bridge" by the Judds.
Country music is like all other kinds these days -- a bit of sad, bad, happy and heart-stirring. You can let yourself be affected by disturbing lyrics found in pop, rap or R&B;, with songs about being against police, morality and the law, and for violence and pot, if that's your nature.
However, it would be good to remember that music is one form of entertainment. Movies and videos about murder and crime, sex and violence, and who shot JFK, are other forms of entertainment.
The idea is to let yourself be entertained by that which you choose to listen to or watch, and be adult enough to enjoy the performance of it and get something positive out of it. Simply avoid the products that you may regard as offensive.
Country music is growing in popularity because more and more people find it enjoyable. The music tells stories about life; and those talented musicians in the backup bands of today's country artists are really super.
In the careers of stars like Dolly Parton, Don Williams, George Jones, Loretta Lynn and Ronnie Milsap, the songs they performed gave us a variety of subjects and moods to savor.
The music of Clint Black, Reba McEntire, Vince Gill and others in today's country music, carries on the same rich tradition.
Critics of country music who cannot appreciate it for its entertainment value must either learn to overcome this hang-up or just do without it and leave this treasured form of enjoyment to the rest of us.
Blaming the victims of gun crimes
In his commentary "Owners of guns must keep tighter control" (Dec. 1), Wiley Hall calls for a "crackdown" on those involved in the theft of guns from the Valley Gun Shop.
The thieves drove a truck over a curb, up two steps, through a brick foundation and an eight-foot window and squeezed through steel security bars welded to the windows.
Mr. Hall would like to see the "dim-witted" people responsible for this held to account. He suggests a "towering bureaucracy that would enforce regulations with a slavish devotion to the law."
But if you think he wants this "towering bureaucracy" to be the criminal justice system, think again.
Unbelievably, the guilty people he wants punished are the victims of the crime -- not the thieves. He believes the shop owners should have known that they needed a "fortress" to protect them.
Let's take this "blame the victim" thinking a step farther.
L Raped? You must have asked for it. How short was your skirt?
Car-jacked? You were in that mall by yourself?
pTC Hit by a stray bullet? Didn't you know this was a bad neighborhood? What on earth were you doing sitting on your own porch?
This way we never have to admit that we're allowing a minuscule portion of our society to imprison the huge majority.
Carol D. Williams
I wonder if the maggots who destroyed the front of Valley GuShop in order to steal firearms waited the required seven days mandated by Maryland law to obtain a handgun?
Certainly they checked to see if what they took was on the useless, tax-wasting "gun roster!"
When will the government get serious about criminals who obtain guns in every illegal way known to man? I suppose it's a lot easier to continue to squawk for new "waiting periods" and "bans" rather than deal with existing laws and lawbreakers.
Ronald L. Dowling