Ugly Building

How fortunate readers are to have Edward Gunts as their architectural critic. He knows Baltimore well, has the city's interests at heart and yet is not afraid to speak with admirable candor about what is happening or should happen on the architectural scene.

His recent critical comments concerning the Constellation Center were right on the mark.

I dare say there are not many folks around who feel this graceless building has done anything but diminish the aesthetics the Inner Harbor. It has been a blight from day one.

Mr. Gunts' suggestion that the structure be used as a visitors' center while the Constellation is being repaired makes sense. As he observed, "The only thing worse than an ugly building is a useless, ugly building."

Janet Heller

Baltimore

Official Language

Your editorial urging Gov. William Donald Schaefer to veto a bill establishing English as Maryland's "official language" is beyond comprehension ("Schaefer's Veto Targets," May 4).

If I were to set out a long-range plan for the destruction of democracy in Maryland or in the United States, I would require all languages to be officially accepted.

That would allow each family to decide what the official language of their school, their community and their business would be.

In a few generations, we could easily approach what we now see in Yugoslavia. One only needs to look at the present scene in Canada to see the serious strife created between English- and French-speaking provinces.

Our objective should be to have a single language for all official business in Maryland and in the United States and to require that students who graduate from secondary schools be able to speak two languages fluently.

Our 21st century citizens must be bilingual to meet the challenges they will face unless the country is willing to accept a second-class status among the nations of the world.

Your assertion that the bill is racism is an ugly charge. I would like your newspaper to have printed the voting record on this bill.

James M. Holway

Ellicott City

Election Spending

Many people want term limits, campaign spending reform and an end to the impact money has on determining who represents the people in government.

The average cost to get elected to a state Senate seat, a part-time job that pays $28,000 a year, was $79,426. Senate President Mike Miller has a $382,910 campaign slush fund. House Speaker Casper R. Taylor, Jr. plans to have a $200-a-plate fund-raiser.

Cynicism is merited when one considers the above examples. How can the average person be truly served by a government that appears to be such a plutocracy?

We need to consider ending these practices and at least limiting spending to no more than the yearly salary paid for any elected office.

Additionally, perhaps it's time to examine limiting campaign fund-raising and spending to the 45 days before the primary.

When we see professional politicians perpetrating the problems that people are so fed up with -- high taxes, lack of courage in dealing with controversial issues, even naming bridges and public buildings after their cronies -- it's time to say "enough" and return government to the people from the arrogance demonstrated by the huge sums of money involved in the current political process.

Geoff Smoot

Hebron

Auction Blues

Your editorial "Disappointing Home Festival" (May 4) was in my opinion inevitable from day one.

We have a number of outstanding auctioneers in Baltimore who are obviously much more familiar with the city than any out-of-town auctioneer could possibly be. To hire an out-of-town firm and subsidize it was ridiculous.

I would not be surprised if actual expenses to the auctioneer did not exceed the amount received by the city for these houses.

This type of sale should be tried again, and the city should ask local auctioneers to submit proposals to handle the sale and its costs.

Alleck A. Resnick

Baltimore

Don't Discount Animal Rights

You state that the Clinton administration is taking stronger action to protect animal rights in Taiwan than human rights in China (Editorial, April 15). I disagree.

Conservation measures and environmental protection are human rights. Extinction is forever and irreversible. If human ignorance, stupidity and greed destroy a species, the rest of humanity, present and future, can no longer see that life form in the flesh. . .

There is greater urgency in protecting an endangered species than in fostering human rights, because there is less time. . .

George Schaller, naturalist, has warned that lion bones and bones of smaller cats can be substituted for tiger bones when the tigers are gone and the customers will not be the wiser.

This superstition that exotic animal parts are good for health or potency already extends to other animal species.

As one species declines, another will take its place and be destroyed.

In East Asia, the gall bladders and urine of bears is considered very beneficial. American black bears are being poached to supply the market as the bear species in Asia -- Asiatic black bear and Malayan sun bear -- are decimated.

No, the poachers and smugglers will not put themselves out of business. They will create new products as the old ones disappear.

That is what the cigarette companies are doing with advertising campaigns directed to youth. And as long as some people have money, they will pay outrageous prices for items of questionable worth.

Witness the baseball card sold at auction for $400,000. It is a compounded tragedy that the world does not take this destruction more seriously.

Earnie W. Daniel

Pasadena

Fear, Ignorance and Outright Bigotry

On May 9 the Baltimore City Council seriously discredited itself by defeating a domestic partnership ordinance, exhibiting a profound lack of courage and leadership evidenced by their willingness to cave in to right-wing and fundamentalist pressure.

Bill 687 would have simply allowed individuals to register their significant, committed relationships with the city in order to accomplish two things.

First, it would allow people in self-defined family units to visit one another in the hospital when critically ill, a compassionate, humanitarian response to personal tragedy not currently available to unmarried partners.

And second, it would assist private employers in determining benefit programs for all employees on an equal basis by offering them a codified definition of domestic partnership corresponding to more traditional family units.

Furthermore, this registration program would only be available to those who cannot get married legally under the present laws of the State of Maryland, and in no way would it equate alternative family structures with marriage.

In other words, it would not apply to heterosexual men and women who decide to live together without benefit of marriage, but would apply to lesbians and gay men, siblings of any age, grandparents taking care of their grandchildren because their teen-age children are parents still attending school, etc.

The radical right in Baltimore City, consisting primarily of segments of the African-American ministerial and Orthodox Jewish communities, has consistently opposed this kind of legislation, which would contribute positively to the city.

Out of fear, ignorance and outright bigotry, the politics of hate have infected our lives and prohibited a rational response to the needs of our contemporary society.

One of the leading proponents of this invidious discrimination is Councilwoman Rikki Spector, with whom I spoke the day of the bill's introduction.

Not only was she unwilling to listen to the arguments so eloquently put forth by our City Council President, Mary Pat Clarke, but she refused to believe the personal stories of those who have suffered this very real prejudice and bias. . .

We expect and deserve better representation for all of the people living in the 5th District which she represents, not just the demands of the political right. To begin to respond objectively to these passions of religious dogma one needs only to use common sense and an ethic of fairness and equality in the workplace and the public arena.

Medical science and our own intuition tell us that people who are seriously ill recover more rapidly and more completely when they are surrounded by those who love them and who are familiar to them. . .Under the current system, hospitals are the ones who decide who can visit a patient, and more often than not their decision is limited to blood relatives.

This discrimination is real, it costs the taxpayers money by prolonging and sometimes increasing the severity of serious illnesses, and it is morally wrong.

The radical right does not have an exclusive right to the use of the words "family," "ethics," "values" and "civil rights." These are concepts which belong to everyone who chooses to embrace them, and they mean different things to different people.

That is what America is about, a pluralistic society supposedly free from religious doctrine, a democracy which allows and encourages individuals to live their lives as they see fit without undue interference from private parties or the government.

It is, however, the government's responsibility to provide and environment which is safe and fair for every citizen so that we all have an equal place at the table.

In Baltimore City many of us are on the outside looking in, wondering why we are required to work an equivalent number of hours at our jobs, pay our full share of taxes, only to walk away with fewer benefits and unequal rights.

The radical right would have you believe we are asking for "special rights" and preferential treatment. We are not, nor have we ever, asked for or expected any more than anyone else. We simply cannot fathom why we should have to live with any less.

Stephen A. Glassman

Baltimore