I feel compelled to respond to the Letter to the Editor from Bo Brink in the June 9 edition of Anthem View, "Consider science perspective in gay marriage debate." I will respond to each of his/her scientific opinions.
1. If science (genetics) says that human sexuality is a choice, then I would like Brink to tell us the exact date he/she "chose" to be heterosexual.
2. Science (medical) says that any sexual behavior between any two people is risky if proper precautions are not followed. I can't name one disease that homosexuals acquire that heterosexuals don't also.
3. Science (child psychology) in the past 50 years may have recommended male and female parents. However, we do not live in that world anymore. Just read the papers today about single mothers and their boyfriends rearing the mother's children. I am heterosexual, but I would be just as happy to have one of my children adopted by a loving, same-sex married couple as I would a heterosexual couple, if I had to part with one. With our divorce rate at about 50 percent, we are not doing a bang-up job creating a stable heterosexual environment.
I believe that the right to marry should be granted to gay people in a civil ceremony. Let the different religions decide who they do and do not marry in their own houses of worship.
-- Wilhelmina H. Issacson
Henderson
TWICE-WEEKLY TRASH PICKUP LOGICAL CHOICE FOR DESERT
I read with interest the letter from Robert Scott on the subject of trash pickup in the June 16 edition of the Summerlin South View, "Twice-a-week trash pickup a waste of tax dollars."
I rarely write to newspapers or magazines, but felt compelled to respond to Mr. Scott's letter.
In the desert heat of Las Vegas, it is my contention that a twice-weekly trash collection is not a wasteful luxury but an imperative, as rotting foodstuffs and other waste products give off noxious odors and are a breeding ground for germs and an attraction for undesirable insects.
There are many other forms of tax-dollar-saving initiatives that could be introduced before a reduction in the trash collection program is even contemplated. I feel sure that the majority of the residents of Summerlin and the greater Las Vegas area would agree.
-- Carlo Pritchard
Las Vegas
I'm writing in response to the question asked by Robert Scott concerning the trash pickup in Las Vegas.
I personally worked for Republic Services for three years and can tell you that twice-a-week pickup is definitely required.
As he stated, the area he lives in is Sun City Summerlin, which is a 55-and-older community, so generally there is not much trash to pick up. The majority of Las Vegas is nowhere near close to comparison. Most routes are designated for around 10 to 12 tons of trash to be picked up daily by two people on one truck.
In Sun City, you have to hit about 1,300 houses for that, whereas most routes generally consist of 600 to 700 houses. There are many routes on the east side of town that have less than 300 houses to pick up that still generate more than 15 tons of trash on any given day.
Las Vegas temperatures and the amount of waste we generate make it impossible to facilitate once-a-week pickup. If anything, more money should be spent on the hiring of more employees.
Keep in mind, these people lift heavy garbage all day long in 100-degree-plus temperatures. It's a very physically demanding job that should earn a lot of respect from the people in this community.
-- Keith Clubb
Las Vegas
PUBLISHING ARREST REPORTS A CHEAP WAY TO FILL SPACE
While I appreciate the hyper-local approach of the Summerlin South View and the convenience of having this publication found in my mailbox, I find a section of the paper disturbing.
The weekly "Police Bookings" that lists innocent residents is deplorable.
Your "Police Bookings" is just that, a booking, an arrest and nothing more. The reason why a responsible journalist would never publish this list of names is simple: Each one of the persons you list under your "Police Bookings" is "innocent until proved guilty."
I looked, and nowhere in your paper do you even bother to mention this. Instead, your approach chooses to convict.
These are people. Some may be found guilty and some may not. So where's your humanity? Compassion? Common sense? And honesty?
But it does not take a journalist or even a third-grader to read your "Police Bookings" and understand it is simply an all-too-easy and financially cheap way to fill a page in the paper.
Ask yourself how responsible is publishing the weekly "Police Bookings?" Do you follow up with each name you list in the "Police Bookings?" How many of the individuals that you have listed end up having all charges dropped? And, do you publish those names?
No. Why? Because it's work? Because you would have to actually do some journalism and follow up each and every case. If you are not willing to do that, then shame on you.
We all know how easy it is to have Metro fax a bookings list each week. I could have one faxed to me. After all, Metro loves the free publicity.
But it's not an accurate example of our community on Metro's performance or our justice system. In fact, had you followed up on each name listed you may discover that Metro has a poor conviction rate.
Try taking a higher approach. A humane approach. A realistic approach.
Archived Editions| Advertising | Contact The Staff
