Letters to the Editor, Jan. 28

Letters to the Editor, Jan. 28

Simpson is wrong

It’s ironic to see William Simpson attacking well-respected scientists while failing to cite relevant science ("Three environmentalists double down on letting forests burn”).

Simpson claims a lack of deer is the source of increased forest fires. Wrong. That horses are a species native to Oregon. Wrong. That releasing feral horses on national forests will protect us from fire. Wildly wrong. And he seems to suggest the dangerous notion that climate change plays no role in today’s forest fires. His one out-of-context quote from a science magazine Simpson seems to have stumbled on doesn’t change those facts.

The scientists Simpson attacked are well-regarded, widely published and stuck to the facts in their opinion piece (“All the king’s horse can’t make wildfires go away”, Dec. 31). If Simpson climbed off his high horse and read some relevant science, he would realize his odd notions about forests and fire are leading our communities away from the solutions we need.

Tim Ream


Law won't stop abortions

This is to those like Scott Lloyd and Terry Duram (men, of course) who think they and the government should be able to determine what a woman should and should not be able to choose to do with her own body:

First, and foremost, making abortion illegal will not deter a desperate woman from obtaining one. It will only make it a more dangerous procedure, forcing her to find a doctor under stealth and in the proverbial "back alley."

Second, and worse, if she can't find a doctor, she will find a way to do it herself or with the help of an untrained friend, which most likely would lead to either irreparable damage to her uterus, or even death from bleeding out. And last but not least, writers should please keep their religious views to themselves and the congregations they belong to; not everyone believes or thinks the way they do.

Chuck Lacey



In her letter Jan. 10, “The Randian way,” Marie Arvette smears Ayn Rand and the Objectivist philosophy. Marie does not know what she is talking about. But maybe she does and sees Objectivism as a threat to her statist ideology.

Statism includes progressivism, socialism, fascism, etc. What these failed social systems have in common is the use of coercion to subjugate individual rights to the will of the state. Example: the Obamacare individual mandate. The catch phrase to rationalize coercion is: “It’s for the collective good.” In reality it sacrifices the good of some for the good of others.

In statism, individual achievement is treated with contempt, as in Obama’s statement, “You didn’t build that.” Objectivism celebrates liberty and individual achievement, free from a statist government that chooses winners and losers. Objectivism advocates capitalism as the way to achieve a just society.

In a capitalist society, government’s purpose is to protect individual rights and property rights, not violate them as a statist society does. A capitalist society is consistent with the principles set forth by our founding fathers and embodied in our Constitution. To learn more about Objectivism go to aynrand.org and read “Atlas Shrugged.”

Gordon W. Dickerson


Share This Story