Editor, 235 S. Nevada Ave., CS, CO 80903 • e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
If your comments are mailed or emailed to us, we'll consider them for publication — unless you request otherwise.
Please include your name, city of residence and a daytime phone number for verification.
After Prop 8's defeat
A few years ago, Focus on the Family donated over half a million dollars toward Proposition 8 in California to ban gay marriage. Well, the Supreme Court's rulings to strike down DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) and to dismiss arguments for Prop 8 made it obvious that Focus' donation was half a million bucks down the drain.
The religious right is a movement based on demagoguery, fear and hatred of certain social groups. History has shown time and again that any such movement anywhere needs an enemy: For the ayatollahs of Iran, the U.S. ("the Great Satan," as they call us) is the archenemy. For Hitler and his Nazi thugs, the Jew was the ultimate enemy. For rabble-rousing demagogues like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, the liberal is responsible for everything that has ever gone wrong with this country, and for the religious right, homosexuality is the root of all evil.
Right now, gay marriage is legal in 13 states plus the District of Columbia, and the sky hasn't fallen yet. Considering the fact that we live in an increasingly secular America, we have reason to believe that there will come a time when homosexuality is no longer the sinister bugaboo that most fundamentalist Christians think it is. It makes me wonder which social group the religious right will go after and demonize when this happens. After all, they can't survive without an enemy.
— Bijan Pirnia
I picked up the latest edition of the Independent this morning, and was surprised to find a very obvious misspelling error on the front page. The article is titled "Prey for rain" (cover story, June 26). "Prey" as it is spelled means to stalk or hunt.
I believe the title is meant to be "Pray for rain."
I can see how this mistake would arise, but I am surprised that the editors did not catch it and correct it before the article went to press, both hardcopy and online.
— Jesse Kuiken
Prey tell II
I just read the cover story of your June 26 Indy, entitled "Prey for rain." Didn't you mean "Pray for rain"? "Prey" is what you hunt for in the woods.
— Doug Roman
Editor's note: To tweak the common saying — by using "prey," instead of "pray" — actually was our intent. Because the subjects of our cover story sit downhill/downstream from the Waldo Canyon burn scar, in a site that saw major flooding beginning with this week's bad rainstorms, they in fact can be viewed as "prey for rain." We had figured the subheadline would help make that clear, but obviously not everything worked as we'd envisioned.
A food critic's food critic
To Bryce Crawford: I have read the Indy from front to back, for years. I have been angered, disgusted by your supposed "critiques" of local eateries.
With the most current rendition of your "critic's" point of view, I can no longer ignore your apparent lack of knowledge on this topic.
I am speaking of "Freshly developed," your most recent published critique (Appetite, June 26). "Speck (a moist smoky ham)" — are you so uneducated about this product to treat it so cavalierly? This is considered one of the premier forms of prosciutto. To treat it, as a reviewer, in such a cavalier way, is just wrong.
As a person that is knowledgeable in food, it is appalling. To pass yourself off as a legitimate critic, just by using verbs, does not a critic make. You must be knowledgeable so as to enlighten the general public with a view, a personalized experience, of the food you write about. If you cannot/will not approach it in a fashion that is knowledgeable, maybe you should let someone else do the task.
There have been so many scathing reviews from your pen, it is hard to enumerate. If you would spend some time, to educate yourself, hide your pretentious self, your columns would be more palatable.
If you must continue with your uneducated attempt, maybe change the name of the column, when you write it, to "Food from the view of a pearl diver." You come off as a dishwasher that thinks he is a critic, because he has spent time in a commercial kitchen: "I know what I am talking about, because I have seen it done."
— Marshall Grant
Say no to Kum & Go
We can do better than a huge gas station and a junk food store! Economically and culturally, we must do better than that!
Goodwill's property at 23rd Street and Colorado Avenue is for sale. At this point, Goodwill hopes to sell to Kum & Go, a national chain. The Goodwill building would be destroyed, and we'd end up with a 10-pump gas station/convenience store, with 24/7 traffic, lights and noise and a sea of concrete.
This acreage presents a huge opportunity to the city: Be leaders and do something outstanding, not something that even at its best would make Old Colorado City just like everyplace else. We need "Come and Stay," not Kum & Go. We need something that maintains and increases — rather than detracts from — the specialness of OCC and the west side as a tourist destination, and as a place to live.
City officials sniffed at a meeting last week when someone suggested the land be made into a park. Think big and long-term, leaders! A park would attract tourists and taxpaying residents.
How about multi-family housing? Walkable neighborhood living is a strong national trend among young people and seniors alike.
How about buildings that are first-floor commercial and other-floor residential? How about a small business or a nonprofit or a charter school, something that brings workers to the neighborhood?
If no developers have stepped up with these interests, then, city officials, get creative about seeking them out and creating attractive multi-use proposals. Think creatively about what could go there; current zoning is irrelevant. Any plan could get a zoning change, just like Kum & Go would need to do.
— Joyce Cheney
New name needed
To Ralph Routon: As you say, perhaps the inner-city parks idea proposed a century ago will finally be realized ("Setback for city's necklace," Between the Lines, April 24). But let's not call it "The Emerald Necklace," which is the name of Boston's famous connected park system.
Our hearts have been with Boston since the marathon bombing, but why copy another city's metaphor when our own history and physical environment are so different? As a consultant to the Colorado Springs Parks Department in 1978 I suggested Park Center, but I admit that's pretty boring.
Why not call up our visionary founder, General William Palmer, and link the inner-city park proposal to him? We already have a Palmer Park, so that name is not a solution.
Surely your readers can come up with a naming idea that's better than The Emerald Necklace. It's worth a try.
— Elaine Freed
Those IRS targets
Regarding Ted Breitenstein's letter of last week, it's a shame that so few people know that progressives as well as conservatives were targeted for extra scrutiny by the IRS. Several news agencies have reported that terms including ''progressive'' and ''occupy'' were used to help pick groups for closer examination. This is based on an internal IRS document obtained by the Associated Press.
Also included: "medical marijuana" and "green energy organizations." Makes you wonder why the conservative-group scrutiny has gotten all the press.
— Amanda Udis-Kessler
The wrong fix
I don't understand what we are doing with immigration.
We have laws that are the legal way to get into our country. Ellis Island did not let anyone in unless they were needed jobwise or had families, and if they were sick they sent them back. All the nationalities came in that way.
We undoubtedly have illegal immigrants from Africa, South America and many other countries; are they included in the amnesty agreement? If not, we're leaving out all the other countries in the world. No matter what we do, we must close off the borders first and then pass laws.
I am very sad about certain Republicans who are willing to vote yes for this bill, against what their voters want, just to get votes from a minority group.
I believe in our freedom, and it is a horrible attack on the ones who try to come into the country legally. An illegal immigrant is a criminal and should not be rewarded for entering our country that way.
— Rodney E. Hammond