'Morals' police should treat everyone equally
According to your Sept. 9 article, the city ordered the Inserection Adult Fantasy Store to remove its sign because "recent community outcry on the sign installation demonstrates that the sign is offensive to the majority of the community."Did the city take a poll of the residents, or only the 15 or so residents that Rep. Terry Yoshinaga organized to protest the store two weeks after it opened? Did the store obtain a permit for the sign? What are the parameters used to judge a sign, or can the Harris administration order a sign's removal by bloody decree?
I'm sure the majority of the residents do not mind the sign or the adult contents of the store. It only adds to the wide selection of pornography that we already have in McCully.
If the city is willing to harass the Inserection store because of its content, it should harass everyone who pushes porn in the neighborhood.
Ben Cline
(Via the Internet)
Adult video store doesn't belong in McCully area
I join the leaders of the McCully community in opposing the establishment of Inserection, an adult pornographic sex shop with an obscene sign on McCully Street. It is a stone's throw from St. Mary's Episcopal Church and the Angels at Play Pre-School.The officials of 7-Eleven are to be commended for their efforts to invalidate a lease that they assert was obtained by misrepresentation.
It is rather disingenuous of Inserection's manager to claim that the controversy has increased the store's business. Such blatant lack of moral conscience and ethical standards are why there is even a greater need for community groups and leaders to take a stand.
I laud Andy Mirikitani for introducing a measure in the City Council designed to keep similar stores out of residential areas. I agree with state Rep. Terry Yoshinaga that this kind of business is not appropriate for our neighborhood.
If the lessee focuses on its "legal" right, it shouldn't complain if the community seeks legislative redress.
The Rev. Erni Uno
Deacon,
St. Mary's Episcopal Church
Television is being cruel to the president
While I have never been a big supporter of President Clinton, his treatment by the broadcast media in airing the grand jury video tape is like returning to the days of the public stockades. It borders on a violation of the Constitution, which bans cruel and unusual punishment.I have more contempt for the broadcast media than for what the president has done. Two wrongs never make a right!
Paul Minczer
(Via the Internet)
Impeachment is too harsh a punishment for Clinton
The United States and the world don't need the chaos that would be created if impeachment proceedings actually take place.The American people, while disgusted with the whole sad Clinton/Lewinsky story, are also angry at the media for their salacious insistence on filling every newspaper in the country with each lurid detail. And a clear majority seem to believe that Clinton should get on with the job of president.
Although I recognize the right of newspaper editors to publish their opinions, I resent the implication that they are speaking for the country when they demand Clinton's resignation.
They are not speaking for me.
Lou Ann Wooddell
(Via the Internet)
This country has forgotten what values are important
Why is it so hard to address what is morally right? We get so caught up in what inconveniences us -- like not getting a tax cut this year, etc. Meanwhile, we forget what is really important: the preservation of society and our ability to live together.What will we miss more, the couple of bucks we save from a tax cut or the ability to trust our leaders?
If our president is so willing to forgo the truth to his "closest and most trusted friend and wife," where does that put us in his pecking order of importance?
When he says it is important to send my son to Sudan to bomb a "pharmaceutical factory" and chance getting killed, how can I trust Clinton that it is because our nation really is endangered? Or maybe the president is just using my son as a distraction to stop the nation from talking about his perjury.
Frank Ong
Kailua
(Via the Internet)
Pharmaceutical industry sees money in supplements
It was refreshing to pick up a paper, in this case your Sept. 17 issue, and see nothing about Bill Clinton or the Bishop Estate on the front page. However, I question your choice of a lead story, "'Dietary supplements -- beware" (reprinted from the New York Times), and a follow-up editorial. Was this really the big news of the day?Of course, consumers need to inform themselves about the potential dangers of anything they are taking, as well as checking out their manufacturers and suppliers. But "throwing down the gauntlet," as the Times story puts it, suggests that the pharmaceutical industry would like to get in on some of the profits of the booming supplement industry.
The requirement that manufacturers "prove safety and efficacy" sounds like a good idea -- good especially for the pharmaceutical companies. They are the ones that have the resources to do extensive testing, while the smaller supplement companies could go out of business.
William Bailey
(Via the Internet)
Write a 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.
Letter to the Editor
