Letters are posted as we receive them during the week, and before they are printed in the paper, so check back frequently to see new letters. If you'd like to send a letter to the editor, follow this link, or email your letter directly to email@example.com. Thanks for your patience.
RECEIVED Mon., April 1, 2013
Re: The Buddy Holly Story
[Film Listings, March 29]: : No, Gary Busey didn't essay the role of Lubbock's favorite son, he assayed it. Sort of. Actually, he didn't do much of either. But your writer meant assay.
[Editor's note: Our grammar mavens have assayed your comments and concluded that Gary Busey did, indeed, essay the role of Buddy Holly. Difficult tasks are essayed; substances are scientifically assayed.]
RECEIVED Mon., April 1, 2013
It seems pretty pathetic that Austin claims to be the music capital and yet we don't have one good rock station. I haven't heard any good rock since KISS in San Antonio stopped playing hard rock. Not that hard rock is the only good rock, but at least KISS would play music that wasn't always popular, but it still sounded good. I don't know if the big corporations bought all the rock stations and told them to only play the big hits. I've heard “La Grange” way more than any man should have to suffer through. Why these old radio programers don't have a clue about real rock music one can only wonder. I know ZZ Top has a wider body of work than we are made to believe on the radio. Not to mention the huge amount of rockers that either live here or come through Austin every day and are totally ignored by our supposedly hip rock stations. It is the job of rock stations to promote rock music, not to promote a bunch of old fossil radio programmers that nobody gives a fuck about. It's a shame that the Internet has taken over the job that was once done so beautifully by radio!
RECEIVED Fri., March 29, 2013
Paraphrase of two positions garnered from NPR News on March 26: The opposition counsel argued that should the U.S. Supreme Court side with the California Court ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional in prohibiting gay marriage, this will be the first time what is in the best interest of children is dismissed in favor of what selfish adults want. This argument is transparently deceptive, in that it is only about perpetrating discrimination and has nothing to contribute to child welfare. For example: The people who oppose gay marriage are only too happy to continue the tradition of non-intercession in the bullying of gay youth, which results in an outrageously high percentage of these teenagers committing suicide. The counsel arguing in favor of striking down Prop 8 correctly stated that it stigmatizes, creates a sub-class of citizens, and delivers the message – gay is not all right – in regard to what the opposition characterizes as this highest, most important of human alliances (marriage). Regardless what equal rights are guaranteed to all citizens of the United States of America by their Constitution, it appears likely that the outcome of this moral crisis hinges on political expediencies.
Kenney C. Kennedy
RECEIVED Fri., March 29, 2013
Senate Bill 714 allows adoptees to obtain their original birth certificates without a court order if the parents listed on the certificate are deceased. Every doctor visit starts out with the question, "What health problems are in your family?" Adoptees would like to be able to answer this question. More than 95% of birth parents desire contact with their adult children, and open records decrease abortion and does not decrease the number of children placed for adoption. Then why does Sen. Donna Campbell, M.D., oppose this bill? As an adoptive mother, one would think she would want her child to have all the rights of every other U.S. citizen to know potential health risks. Neither Alaska nor Kansas ever closed records, and Texas only did so in the Seventies. With knowledge comes action, and many states are restoring equal access to adoptees based upon studies which reflect that there are no adverse reactions to doing so. Please contact Sen. Campbell and urge her to reverse her stand on this issue.
RECEIVED Thu., March 28, 2013
I recently read the article "Environment: Don't Hold Your Breath
" by Amy Smith [News, Dec. 14, 2012], that discusses Texas's current legislation and Senate bills. The article touches on some current progress being made, and also legislators' hopes for the future. I’m a student at the University of Texas and right now I’m taking a class called "Humans and a Changing Ocean." Before taking this class, I had no idea how big of a role our world’s oceans have in the global warming process that has started to transpire in recent decades. I also had no idea how significant and pressing the situation is. In this class, I am learning how to communicate the knowledge that scientists have observed and discovered with policy makers that have the power to enforce the needed changes. I have also learned that intertwining both sides is not easy because scientists and policy makers think differently and come from entirely different worlds. Even though both professions come from opposite sides of the spectrum, both have society’s best interest in mind. As a native Texan and new Austinite, I love reading about the senators and state representatives that show awareness of the growing situation of global warming. It is up to the community to follow the laws and regulations set in place by them. But in order for a broad change to be made, all lawmakers must be fully conscious of global warming and its effects. We may not start to see very detrimental effects for years to come, but scientists are already starting to see signs. Why not start preventing now? It’s not only up to the community, but more so the policy makers to be the ultimate role models. They must set aside their pride and listen to what scientists are trying to explain to them. Thank you again for writing on this topic and helping to inform our capital city of laws in the making. I really appreciate it!