Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, August 23, 1995 TAG: 9508240018
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A10 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
We already have a law stating that those under the age of 18 aren't allowed to purchase or possess tobacco products. And our police enforce this law, right? Our schools have policies in place that penalize students for bringing or using tobacco products on school property. Those policies are enforced, right?
We have responsible merchants who always check the identifications of individuals who look underage, right? We know our children are like us and cannot be tempted to try a product due to a flashy advertisement, right? It's no big deal that we can go to a convenience store where a child can buy candy, and find more tobacco advertisements blasting them in the face than any other product, right?
We all know our local, state and federal politicians are really interested in our welfare, not re-election dollars from the tobacco industry. We're adults; we can influence and protect our own children, and we know what's good for them. Why do we need the federal government to set more rules to protect our children. Right?
It doesn't matter that almost 1,000 people will die each day of tobacco-related diseases, or that 3,000 young people will start using tobacco products each day to replace those who have died. It doesn't matter that the tobacco industry still will not publicly admit that nicotine is an addictive drug. It's OK if young people smoke because we can use our tax dollars to pay for their medical bills due to tobacco-related illnesses.
The federal government needs to worry about more important things instead of our future - our children. Right?
MYLES W. JACKSON ROANOKE
Whenever, welcome the new millenium
GAEL M. Chaney's letter to the editor (Aug. 13, ``Don't pop the corks until 2001'') argues that the new millennium starts in 2001. That argument follows a line of mathematical logic, and cites precedence the United States set by greeting the 20th century in 1901. Historically, then, 2001 is the 100th anniversary of the last centennial celebration. But the millennium? Hmmm.
The beginning of the millennium depends on what you're dating it from. We're certainly not celebrating 2,000 years since Year 1 because Year 1 (more accurately, the Anno Domini year-numbering system) wasn't invented until 525. Nor are we really celebrating 2,000 years since the event Year 1 commemorates, for by 525 no one knew how many years had elapsed since Christ's advent. And consequently, they got it wrong. St. Matthew tells us that Christ was born at least two years before King Herod's death, which historians place in 4 B.C. In other words, if we're celebrating 2,000 years since Christ's nativity, 1994 was our last chance. People who wait until 2001 will celebrate some theoretical, ultimately arbitrary, Year 1 that has no real meaning in human experience.
The meaning which A.D. 2000 has that 2001 doesn't is the first true 1,000-year change in our (the Christian West's) present calendar. Although invented in 525, the A.D. numbering system didn't gain widespread use until after Venerable Bede used it in his best-seller ``Ecclesiastical History of the English People'' in 731. Consequently, those turning from 999 to 1000 had scarcely three centuries' worth of habit and history invested in the new system. We, shifting from the 1000s to the 2000s, will end a millennium's worth of use - significantly, the system's first millennium's worth of use - and begin another.
Chaney wonders whether we're dumber than were those in 1901. I wouldn't say we're smarter, but we're certainly less pedantic. Most likely, people will throw turn-of-the-millennium parties for both 2000 and 2001. I hope the ones for 2000 are larger, because on Jan. 1, 2000, we'll make an emotional change - not a mathematical change - that has been a millennium in the making. I think that's worth a popped cork - or two!
TOM CARTER ROANOKE
Movie reviews are unreliable guides
CONCERNING Mike Mayo's movie reviews, I agree with Melissa Simpson (Aug. 19 letter to the editor, ``Teens don't want to skip this flick''). We cannot listen to one man's opinion about movies. Many movies that Mayo has reviewed and claimed to dislike, I have liked. I especially liked "A Walk in the Clouds.'' I found the story funny, heart-warming, and well-acted.
I've often wondered if it's not the movie critic's outlook on life that's reflected in reviews. My advice to Simpson and others is to read Mayo's reviews and do the opposite. If Mayo likes the movie, avoid it. If he hates it, see it. It's worked for me so far.
MICHELLE SHABAZZ BLACKSBURG
More restraint was shown in Germany
THE SILENT majority becomes aware of the news each day and often becomes disgusted at the lack of response. Then something happens to cause someone to speak out. The unrestrained panic displayed by the Blacksburg police recently was the catalyst for this outburst.
I served in the infantry as a rifleman during World War II and participated in taking hundreds of houses in Germany, including opening locked doors within the houses. Never did I witness any enemy combatant being shot more than once or twice, nor did I witness any GI shooting his buddy in the process.
WILLIAM T. HUBBARD ROANOKE
Carriers do more than deliver mail
IN RESPONSE to Mary Bishop's Aug. 5 article ``Attack keeps mailman from his rounds'':
Letter carriers in the U.S. Postal Service are dedicated federal employees whose working careers consist entirely of serving America as public servants. Assaulting a letter carrier in the performance of his or her duties is a federal offense. Severe penalties can result if an individual is convicted of such an assault.
Letter carriers are professional messengers devoted to preserving the sanctity and privacy of your mail. They are an essential component of your neighborhood, serving your communication interests six days every week. During their rounds, they regularly observe the condition of your neighborhood and personal property. They assist the elderly, watch over children carefully, look after pets, are aware of strangers in the area, report emergency incidents, and remain alert and responsive to your needs.
Letter carriers take pride in their craft of service. Isn't it nice to know in this high-tech age that one federal agent still makes house calls on a daily basis to serve you? That person is your letter carrier who cares about you and your neighborhood. Help us, don't hurt us.
PAUL M. ENGLISH
Vice President, National Association of Letter Carriers Branch 524 ROANOKE
School still takes women's money
WHEN I saw Kenneth P. Kirk's Aug. 17 letter to the editor, ``Destroying The Citadel's tradition,'' I was shocked that anyone could be so sexist and outdated.
When Shannon Faulkner misled The Citadel, she wasn't defying honor codes. She was doing it to prove that she was intelligent and athletic enough to be accepted there. The only thing keeping her out was the fact that she's female. Faulkner didn't want special treatment, but she did want fair treatment.
Kirk says he believes in equality, then he contradicts himself by saying he also believes in single-gender education. He also thinks that Faulkner's very presence would have ruined the educational experience of the male cadets.
I think that if The Citadel really wanted to preserve its brotherhood, it would have stopped taking money from women taxpayers.
KELLY McCARTY VINTON
by CNB