|
Dear Editor,
First I want to start off by saying that I do not usually write
letters. I was raised to be honest and fair to everyone
but an injustice was done to my wife, Paula and I feel compelled
to write.
As owners of Boiceville Garage, we have always been active in
supporting all types of activities in our town (Bennett Playground,
Olive Soccer, Olive Athletics, etc.), but after approximately
10 years of servicing the Olive Police cars this was taken away
from us. Not because we did bad work, not because we were
overpriced but because apparently sometime in July, Mr. Liefeld
received an anonymous letter addressed to him and he became judge,
jury and executioner. In his infinite wisdom, he determined
that my wife was guilty of writing this letter. So without
our knowledge he informed Officer Wittl that the maintenance of
the police vehicles would now go on a rotation basis to spread
the wealth, this was reiterated to my wife by Mr. Liefeld.
Now we are not talking a lot of business because the maintenance
(oil changes, brakes, tires, alignments, etc.) of all three police
cars billed by our company was $2790.12 for the year 2003.
It has now become the principle. My wife was accused and
found guilty without her knowledge, without being able to defend
herself. As you can imagine, this upset her greatly and
she went on a mission of finding the author of this letter which
she did. Mr. Liefeld did call and apologize for his error
and informed her that he was hiring a mechanic to take care of
the police cars. How much will that cost?
So business owners in Olive beware because if you make Mr. Liefeld
upset he will take his revenge in your pocket.
Sincerely,
Joseph W. Minew
West Shokan, NY
Dear Editor,
This is an open letter to the person who wrote in support of the
Federal Marriage Amendment, which would, in her words "define
marriage in the U.S. Constitution as the union of one man and
one woman."
I can only think that a person who would write such a letter in
support of an amendment to the constitution that is specifically
designed to prevent an entire segment of the population from enjoying
the full rights and privileges of citizenship is sadly misinformed.
The misunderstanding often begins with the use of the phrase "gay
marriage." First of all, those involved in the Marriage
Equality movement are not asking for anything that would be characterized
as "gay marriage." What the movement is fighting for
is the right to solemnize loving, committed relationships in the
same manner that heterosexual couples are entitled to. The term
gay marriage implies something other than traditional marriage,
but gay couples who wish to marry are seeking something quite
traditional.
What the woman who wrote this letter fails to understand is that
gay and lesbian families already exist. They share homes and commitments,
raise children, and grow old together. They do all this without
the benefit of over 1,000 rights and privileges routinely afforded
to married couples.
Do you know what you are really saying when you say that there
should be a constitutional amendment denying gay and lesbian couples
the right to marry? Think of a couple that is raising a child
together, equally sharing in all of the joys and responsibilities
of parenthood. If some tragedy befalls the biological parent of
that child and the other parent has not completed the lengthy
and expensive process of adoption, that child would suddenly become
an orphan. The surviving partner who had raised that child would
have no legal rights. Or imagine a couple that has been together
twenty or thirty years. One partner lands in the hospital, and
the other is not allowed to have a say in health care decisions,
or even to visit if their loved one is in intensive care. Or imagine
a couple that spends a lifetime together and shares a home, but
the home is in only one of the partners - names. When this
partner dies, the grieving survivor is homeless.
Sure, for the more savvy and resourceful there are legal precautions
couples can take to avert a few of these disasters, but not all
of them. There is no way a surviving partner can collect social
security benefits or a gay or lesbian couple can file a joint
tax return. Unless one of the partners works for a company that
offers Domestic Partner benefits, there is no way one partner
can protect the other with health insurance. So what you are really
saying when you support the Federal Marriage Amendment is that
you wish to deny tax paying citizens the full benefits of being
Americans because you disapprove of their choice in partners.
You argue
in your letter that the supporters of this amendment, "simply
want to preserve the institution of marriage as it has served
society for centuries." This argument completely fails to
take into account the fact that marriage has already changed over
time. At one time marriage meant that a husband owned his wife.
Not too long ago a woman's property automatically belonged
to her husband. There are many of us alive who remember when it
was illegal for people of different races to marry.
What are you so afraid of? How is it that you think that your
marriage will somehow be diminished if others are allowed to embrace
the institution? Why would gay and lesbian couples wish to harm
an institution in which they are asking to participate? It's
not as if granting gay and lesbian couples the right to marry
would suddenly break up heterosexual marriages and cause a groundswell
of homosexuality. And certainly, your wish to deny gay and lesbian
couples the right to solemnize their relationships will not stop
lesbian and gay people from forming lasting bonds. Gay and lesbian
couples have always managed to build lives together despite a
lack of the same support that is routinely granted to others.
Make no mistake, though. This is the Civil Rights Movement of
the 21st Century. Gay and lesbian people will not stand by indefinitely
and be treated like second class citizens. All loving, committed
relationships are worthy of being honored and celebrated. Supporters
of the Federal Marriage Amendment need to remember that the people
whose lives they wish to limit participate in American society,
despite being denied full civil rights by narrow-minded bigots.
Just like you, lesbian and gay people work, pay taxes, and vote.
Amanda Gulla and Ann Sherrill
Chichester, NY
Dear Editor,
It seems like President Bush will do almost anything to get himself
re-elected. Recently he announced an overhaul of our military
and then on August the 19th he vowed to push for more Guard
and Reserve benefits. Why did he wait until this late in the election
process to make these announcements? If those two recent announcements
weren't made to get the military and military family vote
I don't know what else you could call it. And, I expect
to see some big promises come out of the Republican convention.
I don't think Bush deserves to be re-elected because
he took this country to war for reasons that some of those reasons
have proved to be untrue, gave the biggest tax breaks to the very
wealthy and his economical and employment plan doesn't seem
to be working. I haven't heard him talk about what he's
going to do about health care coverage and a real prescription
plan. I haven't heard him talk about any of his accomplishments
and I haven't heard him address the high price of gasoline and
fuel oil. According to an article in the Daily Freeman Steve Schmidt
a Bush campaign spokesman said that the Bush campaign has never
and will never question John Kerrey's service in Vietnam.
Yet so far Bush hasn't denounced the ad put out by the "Swift
Boat Veterans for Truth. The ad questions Kerry's war record.
Over 950 young men and women have died and thousands have been
wounded since the war began. I wonder if Mr. Bush watches the
news and if he does, I wonder what he thinks about all those that
have died and those that may never walk again.
William Warnecke
Glenford, NY
Dear Editor,
The black bears are coming! In Woodstock we are in the grace period
of our relations with the black bear community. The problems are
here but not epidemic yet. Hunting and shooting bears has been
the time-honored tradition of "controlling" populations
of animals that we don't care for or are challenged by. There
are some significant problems with this approach. In a bear hunt
the mother bears are frequently shot leaving their young with
even fewer skills for hunting in the wild. Bears, like all wildlife
will look for the easiest supply of food. Bears need a food supply
that will give them sufficient energy to hibernate through the
winter season. We know from studies by wildlife biologists that
animals breed in numbers suited to the food supply. The large
population of bears in the Catskills, despite our continued encroachment
on their arboreal habitat, is an indication of ample food supply.
And what is that food supply? It is obvious that the human population
with our generous offers of birdseed, garbage and pet foods is
making a huge difference to the bears. The food that we throw
away, our leftover pizza, sweets, bar-b-que and yes, our tofu
offer a high calorie, high fat and high sugar diet to the bears.
Bears are not immune to this addictive diet any more than we are.
It is also a diet that allows them to gain the necessary pounds
needed for hibernation. I've heard suggestions that we cut down
some of our forests so that there will be new growth of food for
the bears. This will not work because the quality of food offered
by the new growth forest cannot compare to the food we are offering
to them.
It is helpful to put yourself in the place of the bears to understand
their behavior and the reasons why they are coming into our homes.
From their perspective humans are a truly generous and jolly lot.
We are not only supplying them with food, but we are also friendly
for the most part. Black bears are timid and shy by nature. Their
usual defense is to run away or climb a tree. We are notably rude
in our behavior towards bears, ignoring their requests to move
away and leave them alone. Our repeated behaviors eventually habituate
the bears. The stories about the bears in Phoenicia and other
Catskill communities illustrate the pattern. Many people love
to see the bears, and an individual bear taking leftovers out
of a dumpster can be cute and fun. It doesn't seem to be a problem.
The bears feel the tolerance and get over their shyness. Eventually
there is more than one bear and problems arise. It seems a very
short time passes between the cute bear stage and the problem
bear stage. The DEC has a policy of trying to trap the problem
bears three times, and then the bear is killed. It is important
to note that the DEC no longer has any place to take a problem
bear. So this exercise is fruitless. As a wildlife rehabilitator
who has studied bears with Lynn Rogers, Phd, the world's chief
bear authority, I receive many calls about bear problems. People
want me to "do" something, and this is what I heard
in Phoenicia and Shandaken recently. If I tell the caller to take
in their garbage or take down their birdfeeders they frequently
say they don't want to. Well, then you will continue to have problems
with bears. The time where we asked others to take care of these
problems is over. It is unfair to call the town boards, the police,
the DEC or the rehabbers and say, "Do something!" Each
of us must address this problem now, individually and as a community.
Birdfeeders must become a winter activity. A single person cannot
be the exception. All garbage must be stored in bear resistant
garbage cans (see sources below), or garbage must be put out in
the morning the day of your pickup. Town boards can help by working
with other towns to work out agreements with the waste disposal
companies. These companies are developing and beginning to over
specially built dumpsters for restaurants and businesses that
are bear proof. We can ask for pick up times that start at 7:30
a.m. instead of 5:30 a.m. It is unreasonable to ask people to
get up at 5 am to put out their garbage. In our area we have many
weekenders who need help to put their garbage out. Perhaps the
towns could have a drop off for garbage. Our response to the bears
needs to be community based and thorough. Information must be
offered to all residents and to all visitors and that information
is needed now. By 2005 Woodstock could be having the severe level
of problems being experienced by Phoenicia.
It is possible to coexist with bears. There are many towns that
do this. Instead of war against the bears, involving throwing
things, trapping and killing them we can instead live in balance
with them. We are both part of the ecosystem of our planet. Our
behaviors influence each other. By nature both humans and bears
are compassionate peaceful creatures. We can take responsibility
for eliminating the food supply. We can learn more about the black
bears. Bears and people CAN live harmoniously together. It is
an opportunity to try peace here at home.
To learn more about bears go to www.bearstudy.org and www.savenjbears.com
For information about bear proof garbage containers contact the
Save New Jersey Bears website above or the Region 3 DEC office
at 256-3061. Ravensbeard Wildlife Center one of our local wildlife
organizations also has pamphlets available at Sunflower Health
Foods in Woodstock and other local businesses.
Kristine Flones
Saugerties, NY
Dear Editor,
Is it just me or does anyone else find it absolutely amazing that
once mad-cow disease threatened us, the U.S. government could
track a cow born in Canada almost three years ago, right to the
stall where she sleeps in the state of Washington, and determine
exactly what that cow ate. They can also track her calves right
to their stalls, and tell you what kind of feed they ate.
But they are unable to locate 11 million illegal aliens wandering
around in the country, including people that are trying to blow
up important structures in the U.S.
My solution is to give every illegal alien a cow as soon
as they enter the country.
GOD BLESS AMERICA
Dominick LoGiudice
Big Indian, NY
|
