Letters

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

For many of us, the winter is time for playing in the snow outside. However, these weather conditions can make even normal activities more dangerous. There is also potential for injury while participating in outdoor activities such as skating, snowboarding and skiing. Children (and adults) need to be careful during the winter months in order to prevent brain injury.

Children should wear helmets when they participate in winter sports such as skiing, sledding, snowboarding and ice hockey. There are different helmets for each activity, so make sure you wear sport-specific, properly fitted gear. Parents, you should set a good example by wearing your helmet too.

Sledding is often a favorite activity following a big snowstorm. However, an injury can occur when the sled collides with something like a tree, fence or rock or gets out of control. Parents should look for hidden dangers by walking the slope before children take their first trip down it. Children should always sit up, facing forward with feet first. Never sled head first. Avoid icy slopes whenever possible.

Ice skating and ice hockey can be very dangerous, especially if you fall. Both activities require a lot of coordination and skill to glide safely over the ice. Ice hockey players should wear a helmet to protect their heads from collision with other players as well as blows to the head from hockey puck or stick.

For more information about brain injury or the services of the Brain Injury Association of Virginia contact me at 525-4516 or Jessica@biav.net.

Jessica Rouse
122 Halifax Ave.
Stephens City
Jan. 12, 2012

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

The article (Jan. 12 issue) about the 92-year-old man who hadn't received his fuel assistance check was supposed to generate sympathy. The man had a coffee cup with the logo "Grandpa."

Assuming that he has a least three generations of family who left him without heat since November and who have been buying him cigarettes at $45 a carton -- $180 monthly -- no, you'll not have my sympathy.

The family should be held responsible for this man's welfare and safety. The missing fuel assistance check should have been the secondary topic of this attempt at a human-interest story.

TERESA FORSYTH
108 S. Fairfax Blvd.
Ranson, W.Va.
Jan. 13, 2012

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

Do all atheists spew anger, hatred and unhappiness as you do, Mr. Rigelon (letter, Dec. 27 issue)?

You mention nothing that atheists do for others in need. You "applaud" the myriad works the Roman Catholic Church does in education, hospitals, soup kitchens, social work, caring for the elderly, the indigent, pregnant women and children in need of adoption. Then you accuse the church of not doing enough.

Currently in Massachusetts, Catholic Charities had to shut down adoption service because of same-sex marriage. When Obamacare comes to fruition, Catholic hospitals and many other Catholic services will have to shut down because, in obedience to their faith, they cannot perform abortions, sterilizations or euthanasia. Catholics will be denied their religious freedom because they are trying to help those in need.

The Catholic Church teaches that each person has a free will. No one is forced to accept church teachings.

The Obama administration did not allow the morning-after pill to be sold over the counter because it would hurt his re-election. You want 10-year-olds to be sexually active and get the pill to prevent pregnancy. Most people understand how dangerous that is. But wait. If he gets re-elected the pill will be available in January 2013.

You talk about "relief of human suffering" while at the same time supporting the slaughter of more than 60 billion babies by abortion since Roe v. Wade. Their mothers suffer death, sterilization and physical and psychological impairment because of these heinous procedures.

The church teaches that chastity, marriage and life are sacred and should be respected. You support promiscuity, divorce and death for babies and old people.

Abortion and contraception, which the church opposes, have made women the sexual playthings of irresponsible men who take their jollies with no consequences. Currently, the highest number of children in poverty are those in single-parent families. If women don't kill their babies, men just walk away.

The world would be a happier, kinder place if people, especially Catholics, obeyed the teachings of Christ's church.

Please God, you find a happier way of living.

GERARD RENINGER
20 Gloucester Road
Front Royal
Jan. 9, 2012

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

In the Dec. 27 issue Gene Rigelon accuses the Roman Catholic Church of conducting a "war on women's rights" in regard to the Plan B contraception pill. He also accused the Catholic Church of a systemic cover-up of the child abuse scandals. As a Catholic, I should be offended, but, having read some of his previous ramblings, he is difficult to take seriously.

He pretends to take a "realistic" view of the world and that "it is immoral to wait for an invisible friend in the sky to act for us" (quote is his from a secular humanist website, http://sash.wash.org/message.php).

I vividly remember pictures of Mother Teresa sitting and waiting for God to act to fix poverty in Calcutta. The woman hardly slept and tirelessly worked for the "poorest of the poor." In fact, most proclaimed saints in the church are saints due to their inspired activism.

Out of morbid curiosity, I did visit the website for secular humanism in the Washington, D.C., area. Under "activism" only several items were listed. They were all self-serving projects promoting secular humanism. None had to do with serving the poor. Contrast this with Catholic Charities, which is the largest charitable organization worldwide.

Rigelon likes to deal with the world as he finds it. Well, it is a world in which Jesus Christ lived, taught and consequently had a more profound effect on history than any other man. What is Rigelon's "take" on Christ? How does he deal with the "reality" of Christ?

Finally, I believe that secular humanism is simply a polite euphemism for atheism. I believe also that there are atheists who had a profound effect on the world in the last century. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong all had a profound effect on the world, or at least the population, being the most successful and prolific mass murderers in history.

Bill Castellan
259 Chestnut Hill Drive
Front Royal
Jan. 2, 2012

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

Darwin's "Origin of the Species" is only a theory, not a fact.

It's hard to imagine two more diverse views of our origins that the biblical model of creation and atheistic evolution.

The first presents a creation that was planned, calculated, with nothing left to chance. In contrast, the evolutionary model is all chance.

In the biblical account, everything was created for a purpose; God had an end goal, a purpose for what he created. In contrast, evolution works on the premise that there is no final goal, no purpose-driven force motivating what's created. Random mutation and natural selection (products of chance) work together blindly, keeping what functions and discarding what doesn't.

Finally, the biblical account teaches that humans were made in the image of God. Evolution teaches that they are made in the image of whatever primate just happened to precede Homo sapiens.

Everything in the creation account, then in contrast to the various evolutionary models -- which depict our creation as the work of forces violently competing with each other -- reveals a God who loves his creation, who cares about it and who purposely and carefully designed it.

There's nothing impersonal about the creation, nothing emotionless, nothing purposeless.

Love was there at the start of the creation week. What a contrast to evolution, which teaches that love somehow emerged only after billions of years of selfish violence. Love will be there when this damaged version of creation is created anew.

Those who believe in theories are in for a big surprise some day.

JOHN W. ORNDORFF
746 McIlwee Lane
Star Tannery
Jan. 11, 2012

Editor's note: The following letter is a shortened version of an essay by a student in a junior AP English class at Handley High School. The complete essay is posted at www.nvdaily.com/opinion.

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

Defenseless animals are forced to endure cruel experimentation in an attempt to ensure the safety and effectiveness of products to be used by humans.

Animal experimentation continues because society holds the perception that it is necessary for the development of vaccines, cures and treatments for human illness. The fear is that without animal experimentation, our health and well-being would be put at risk.

In reality, results derived from animal testing have proved costly to human health because an animal body reacts differently than a human body does to different drugs, vaccines and experiments.

Penicillin, a drug that has saved countless human lives, was delayed for more than 10 years because it killed rabbits and other animals in experimentation. The arthritis drug Vioxx, which appeared to be safe for animal hearts, was responsible for as many as 140,000 heart attacks and strokes in the United States alone.

Yet animal testing continues while alternatives such as in-vitro (test tube) testing and computer-modeling techniques as well as studies on human volunteers, patients and cadavers are readily available. Right now millions of mice, rabbits, cats, dogs, primates and other animals lie in loneliness and agony, awaiting cruel experimentation across the country.

The Animal Welfare Act is the only federal law in the United States that regulates the treatment of animals in research. Although it covers "any live or dead dog, cat, nonhuman primate, guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or any other warm-blooded animal", it excludes, among others, birds, rats and mice bred for use in research. This gives the research industry the ability to subject birds, rats and mice, which make up about 95 percent of all laboratory animals, to procedures and conditions that would be illegal for animals that are covered in the Animal Welfare Act.

These animals have no way to expose their malicious experimenters and, therefore, need representation from the public. Anyone can take a stand by supporting a cruelty-free charity or company, boycotting animal-tested products or by writing a letter to his congressman.

Animal testing is both unethical and unnecessary and needs to be illegal in the United States.

Megan Dunford
709 Lake Drive
Winchester
Jan. 12, 2012

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

I have a resupply of "living wills" I would like to send to anyone free who sends me a self-addressed, stamped envelope.

It is a legal document and simple to fill out. No lawyers needed, just two witnesses. This will eliminate any problems down the road. You can change your mind anytime by filling out a new will. You can make copies of the will and give to your hospital (which requires that you have one), doctor or anyone who needs one.

You must check and initial your choice of decision. Follow the instructions of the witnesses' section. Protect your wishes by filling out a living will. Free.

WILLIAM A. PERRY JR.
1660 Strasburg Road
Front Royal
Jan. 16, 2012