Letters to the Editor
Monday, April 22, 1996
Why does state need info about our federal taxes?
I wonder why the state tax office needs so much additional information that is not required to be reported. Example: interest on federal obligations which is not reportable; amounts of retirement income that are not taxed by state and also not reportable.
The state asked for this information when it requested every citizen to include the first page of his or her federal 1040 tax return as part of the Form N-11. Are they looking at ways to tax you more? We are already one of the highest tax states. I guess that they want the state to be No. 1 in taxes. Are they Big Brother?
Robert J. Thomas
Sorry, but 'apology bill' does not change law
You have reported (April 3) the decision of Judge Dan Heely regarding a claim that the state has no legal right to sell ceded lands. You state that the judge ruled against the state by denying the state's motion for summary judgment, and in doing so cited the so-called "apology bill" as authority for his ruling. If that is so, we have all been badly served by Judge Heely.
The so-called apology bill is not a bill at all but a concurrent resolution, and as such is not a statute, does not have the force or effect of law and cannot be used for any purpose for which an exercise of legislative power is necessary. Judge Heely would be plainly wrong in using that resolution as authority for anything.
John W. Goemans
Gay marriage won't signal apocalyptic end of society
The March 29 View Point column, "Gay marriage threatens social order," was both morally disgusting and intellectually laughable. The idea that something as small-scale as homosexual marriage could destroy human society is preposterous.
Authors James Hochberg and Marie Sheldon claim that "homosexual activists themselves espouse the destruction of the family unit." They then proceed to quote one homosexual activist, whose quote needs radical interpretation before it can be even remotely connected with the above message. An interesting tactic, as propaganda goes, but an old one.
The claim that heterosexual marriage protects the foundations of self-government where homosexual marriage does not is also made. Are all homosexuals now communists and aspiring dictators?
Perhaps the next time homosexual marriage is criticized, it should be with facts, not propaganda and name-calling.
Bret Heilig
Kailua
Condoning gay marriages means forsaking principles
If I correctly understood the tenor of your April 13 editorial, "Same-sex marriage foes are struggling," in order to attain a "progressive outlook," we should hop on the bandwagon and join the parade led by our state Supreme Court. To do otherwise would be a "step back into a bygone era."
It is true that "customs change with an evolving social order" but it is also true that principles do not change. In order to guide our lives, we have been given principles that are eternal and never-changing.
These principles are grounded in truth. To avoid "step(ping) back into a bygone era" is tantamount to abandoning our principles.
There is only one way that this parade can lead - to our destruction.
Rijo Hori
Want to write a letter to the editor? Let all Star-Bulletin readers know what you think. Please keep your letter to about 200 words. You can send it by e-mail to letters@starbulletin.com or you can fill in the online form for a faster response. Or print it and mail it to: Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, Hawaii 96802. Or fax it to: 523-8509. Always be sure to include your daytime phone number.