A broader view
I read Pat LaMarche’s July 14 column, “The pursuit of marital happiness,” and she completely overlooks one big issue: Some people fight gay marriages to protect their religion.
Our Constitution protects both, not just the one you want to accept.
True, there are some people who fight against gay marriage as a way to push their views, vilifying the opposition. But Pat LaMarche does that in her piece as well.
She goes on and throws in little jabs, saying NOM “cares little or nothing for the welfare of women,” and is prejudiced and homophobic.
If people really want the gay and lesbian community to be treated better, here’s where you start. First, stop vilifying people with different beliefs. After the gay marriage bill was overturned, the name-calling and hatred afterwards was sickening.
Second, stop trying to force people to accept homosexuality as OK, and start to make people realize that homosexuals are human. A person has just as much right to be gay as a person has to believe that being gay is wrong.
If you want to stop one, you will stop the other. When will either side figure this out?
Jackson should pay
I am a resident of Naples, Fla., but summer in Camden where my wife was born and we were married. I read with interest the article by Meg Haskell on the Jackson Lab.
I thought I would add a note as to why there is controversy. I don’t believe the Collier County residents are evenly split. The residents are concerned that with a reduction in services and increased unemployment this is not the time to tax the residents $130 million.
I have no strong feelings but I am bothered by the fact that the commissioners don’t want to put the issue on the ballot and are actively seeking ways to bypass this citizen’s request.
What also isn’t mentioned is that it doesn’t stop at $130 million.
Jackson also needs another $100 million in donations. We have many volunteer groups providing free care, housing and other community needs that could be sucked dry if that amount of philanthropy was diverted to Jackson.
Jackson has to come up with its own cash to offset some of these concerns.
In Italy the Ponte Vecchio bridge has for more than 1,000 years spanned a river for people and wagon traffic, but with shops built on each side of the bridge and street, has been an aerial and aquatic mall for at least 150 years before Columbus.
Our Waldo-Hancock bridge without vehicle traffic awaits its fate, perhaps dynamited to the bottom of the river. If it isn’t wide enough and strong enough for trucks, I bet it would be just fine for wheelbarrows. If an Italian bridge site could survive 1,000 years, I wonder how long Waldo-Hancock might last as a quaint and unique place for Maine’s very small businesses to sell their products to the heavy tourist traffic that summer brings.
Perhaps up to several hundred unemployed Mainers could hire themselves off as shopkeepers under canvas on the Ponte Penobscot Project.
BP no friend to gulf
BP’s record of the past five years proves it is the worst offender in the oil and gas industry. In 2005, it was negligent in the Texas oil refinery explosion. The Baker Commission found BP had cut corners to place profit over safety, and in 2006 it created the worst land spill with Alaskan North Slope incidents.
BP has been cited for more than 750 violations by OSHA since 2007.
The next highest offending company in the industry had eight violations. BP’s record for safety speaks for itself.
BP has caused the largest disaster due to oil drilling ever in North America. It has covered up the facts since the first day.
Haliburton stressed in a report that is should have used 21 sleeves, and BP used six sleeves and a straight pipe saving $12 million. An acoustic test of the cement refractoring job was skipped, and it saved $120,000.
BP is still trying to bury this case in finding favorable judges to oversee its projects. It is time to stop issuing defense oil contracts.
This corporation is not a friend to the gulf.
King, Carter invitation
I have followed with considerable interest the recent discourse between two former political rivals in our state concerning proposed industrial wind turbines for the mountains and ridgelines of central and western Maine.
Former Gov. Angus King and political opponent Jonathan Carter are embroiled in a passionate debate on this subject, and I am curious about the accuracy of information that has been presented during these discussions. I would appreciate the opportunity to examine and clarify the seemingly erroneous information presented within.
I am not, nor do I have any desire to be, a political activist. Nor am I an eloquent debater. I am, however, deeply concerned about the future of our state, our quality of life and place, and the legacy we are leaving to our children and grandchildren.
Therefore, I hereby extend a public invitation to Gov. King, Mr. Carter and any other proponents or opponents of proposed industrial wind projects on the mountains and ridges of central and western Maine, to join me in a debate on the merits versus the drawbacks of these projects. The time and place of said debate can be scheduled at their conveniences, although it should be held in a public forum with media coverage in order to educate as many people as possible.
Reach me at firstname.lastname@example.org or call 399-3436.