|
History on Repeat
In reference to Mr. Neely’s [Oct. 21] “Secret History” article addressing President Bush and Iraq, I can only say, “Bravo!”
His earlier articles, in which he compared the current war and its aftermath to events in history, added to parallels that I recognized on more recent events, such as Vietnam.
In my opinion, the context of history and the lessons we can gain from it are largely absent from the current debate over Iraq from both Republicans and Democrats.
One can only wish that our leaders would take more guidance from history and from writers, such as Mr. Neely, who will not let us forget it.
Philip Royer
Knoxville
Various Abuses
One Garvin L. Greene wrote in [Oct. 14] to compare sexual preferences of sex (i.e. male/female) to sexual preferences of pedophilia and polygamy. He seemed to think that Barry Henderson was contradicting himself by supporting gay rights but not the right of a priest to have sex with a young boy.
While I do see certain parallels between same-sex marriage and polygamy, keep in mind that polygamy involves multiple spouses and same-sex marriage does not. I have never met this person who Mr. Greene describes as “vociferous in their rejection of polygamy,” but accepting of same-sex marriage; granted, he and I probably hang out in different social circles.
As for pedophilia, while I agree that this is, indeed, a sexual preference, there are certain issues of consent and abuse of power involved in adults having sex with minors. This type of relationship is not typically allowed in our culture because: a.) children (people under 18) are generally not considered to have the mental capacity to fully understand the consequences of their actions; and b.) adults (a Catholic priest would be an extreme case) are in a position of power that makes the question of consent a bit tricky, to say the least.
Also, in case Mr. Greene got his ideas about Greek culture from Plato, I suggest he reread that text; if you look carefully you can tell that “Man-Boy Love” was not as common as one might imagine.
Mr. Greene also mentioned “incurable diseases,” (I assume he means AIDS, because anyone willing to compare homosexuality to pedophilia is going to bring up AIDS) and for this case I suggest he think a little more deeply about the nature of HIV; the virus doesn’t care what bodily fluid you contract it from; it doesn’t care what you were doing at the time you contracted it; it doesn’t care what sexual position you contract it in; it doesn’t care what sex you are; and it certainly has never been a disease limited to homosexuals.
For my part, I have friends who are gay, and I see them forced to put up with stuff on a daily basis that most straight people would go to court over. To me, same-sex marriage is simply about allowing people who are consenting, loving, same-sex adults to be treated like human beings. Face it, folks: straight people commit sodomy (which is more inclusive a term than most people are aware of); straight people get divorced at a 50 percent rate; straight people get STDs; straight people mess up their kids; and straight people are the ones in power. Gay people are not going to “ruin” (i.e. change) marriage; straight people already did that.
Preston McCall
Knoxville
Not a ‘Preference’
I feel like I need to respond to Mr. Garvin Greene’s [Oct. 14] letter regarding sexual “preference,” in which he compares it to such immoral practices as molestation and polygamy.
I would like to point out that I am a 28-year-old gay male who has dealt with my sexuality my whole life, and that at no point have I ever considered it a “preference.” I have always objected to the term “sexual preference,” for I know in my heart that it was not something I preferred, but simply the way I was born, and I have dealt with it accordingly thus far.
I rarely hear heterosexuality deemed as a “preference,” especially since it is so openly accepted as “moral” and “normal.”
I, for one, never had the opportunity to make a choice regarding my sexuality.
Brian Paul
Knoxville
Thanks for Nothing
This is in regard to the eviction of the Woodhill Court mobile home park, which was purchased by Murphy Development, LLC. on Oct. 4.
We received a letter from David Shiflett, Manager of Woodhill Court on Oct. 5 stating that the place had been sold and our month-to-month lease is being terminated, effective Nov. 30, 2004, please have your mobile home moved to another site by the end of that date. Any comments or questions should be directed to the Tennessee Housing Management at 523-6201.
Well...we are dealing with people’s lives here, not just mobile homes! Some of the residents have been here for years and some are old or disabled, and there are also children involved as well. We feel that we have been treated unfairly and seem to have no legal rights at all here. We have contacted CAC, Salvation Army, Urban League, TV stations, the mayor’s office and lots of other organizations, all to no avail.
If this had been a natural disaster, there would be funds and help from the government and local organizations, but since this isn’t, everyone turns a deaf ear. We need help and feel that the community has let us down. Knoxville spends so much money on the Vols, and Boomsday, but when its citizens need help, they pass the buck, or look the other way.
We received less than two months’ notice to vacate the premises, and we feel that is an unreasonable amount of time to make a life-changing decision. Not to mention the expense of moving a mobile home these days.
Murphy Development has been contacted, and the woman who answered only said that they were going to work with the residents who needed help, and we would receive a letter from them about that...well needless to say that was last week and we have not received any letter.
We are trying to sell our home and move back to Florida, where at least you know where you stand with the community, and it’s not hidden under the guise of “southern hospitality.”
So thanks for nothing Knoxville!
Virginia LaRusse
Knoxville
Road to Nowhere
The last few years have been very exciting for downtown Knoxville. A once almost-deserted place is coming back to life. Unfortunately it is an area already choked by expressways, and now TDOT wants to make I-40 even larger. I think this is a terrible idea. They state reasons of safety for this plan.
That’s great, I’m glad they are concerned for the automobiles on the expressway, but what about the people walking underneath. I frequently ride my bike to UT, or walk to downtown or the Old City from my home on 5th avenue. There are always people hanging out underneath the expressway. Granted 99.9 percent of them are great people, but underneath an expressway is an easy place for criminal activity.
So, apparently the safety of people traveling in their cars above is more important than the people trying to walk underneath. Secondly, the expressway creates a clear division between areas to the north and downtown. This deters many people from walking or cycling instead of driving to the great places downtown. Finally, research shows that expanding a highway is only a temporary solution to congestion. I suppose it will also only be a temporary solution to the safety of those driving along it.
What a waste of money. So much effort is being put into downtown, and this is taking away so much from that effort. Knoxville is a great city, with the potential to be even greater. Nashville recently came up with the “Plan of Nashville,” which suggests removing the highways that loop around downtown Nashville; maybe Knoxville should consider the same, or at least come up with alternatives to the expansion of I-40.
Craig Reschke
Knoxville
October 28, 2004 • Vol 14, No. 44
© 2004 Metro Pulse
|
| 
