New LowEditor: Your treatment of Bill Huppert's Sept. 13...

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

September 21, 1990

New Low

Editor: Your treatment of Bill Huppert's Sept. 13 letter just might win you an award. The well-written letter concerned the need to protect rockfish from man's greed. You enhanced it with a large-sized headline, ''Mass Murder of Rockfish.''

Immediately above this framed letter was a KAL cartoon showing the Pro Choice football team's crushing defeat of Pro Life in recent state primary elections.

The sad and bitter irony of your editorial treatment of the abortion issue and your editorial treatment of rockfish is this: It's OK to murder millions of innocent pre-born human infants by abortion, but it's not OK to murder millions of rockfish.

This contrasting treatment should win you this year's Sodom and Gomorrah Award.

The Sun's editorial value system has reached a new low, but I'm not giving up. I can envision a set of circumstances wherein your paper can be of positive value. It would require that I take up fishing and then be lucky enough to catch some fish.

Joseph A. Frese.

Baltimore.

UM Salaries

Editor: I was wondering what the University of Maryland board regents would do with all that money saved from the release of a few hundred workers. It has been allocated to the area in most need of funds -- college presidents (Sept. 9 Sun, "UM's presidents get pay raises as they cut costs"). Someone leaked the information.

Chancellor Donald Langenberg claims current salaries ''are a little above average, but not much above average. We all expect A-plus performance from our presidents . . . and some were getting C-plus salaries.'' Since Maryland has C-plus institutions it would seem logical that the presidents would get C-plus salaries.

Think what the president of a top-rated university like the University of Virginia will want next. It reminds me of baseball players and orchestra musicians.

Nowadays the whole system is reversed. It used to be that you prove yourself and then get the big bucks. Now the big bucks come first and of course everyone is doing a magnificent job especially in a bureaucracy controlled by politicians.

Now what was that amount that Dr. Augustus A. White turned down -- $245,000? Any bets on who will break the $200,000 mark first?

R. D. Bush.

Columbia.

Many Issues

Editor: While reading over the election results for local, state and national offices it occurred to me that so many of these contests were decided upon the single issue of abortion and the code word, "pro-choice."

I think any fair-minded person is of the opinion that there is a time for abortion under a broad spectrum of criteria. However, I do not think that a representative of all the people in a given jurisdiction should be elected on any one issue.

We have thousands of our young men and women in Saudi Arabia with their lives in danger; we have violent crime on the streets increasing every day; the drug problem is just about out of control; and yet we have candidates who are putting abortion rights above and beyond those most serious issues this country has ever faced.

Legislators at any level should be cognizant of all the issues which concern their constituents and not any one ethnic, racial, religious or sexual persuasion.

E. F. Bright.

Timonium.

War by Proxy

Editor: The United States has been pressuring Japan not only to increase monetary contributions, but also to provide military forces to support the economic boycott of Iraq. Complaints are being voiced in Congress that Japan, while heavily dependent on Middle East oil, is not willing to commit its military to protect the flow of oil from the region.

The situation is not without irony. The last time Japan resorted to a military solution to an oil problem was when it bombed Pearl Harbor.

The immediate cause of the Pacific War was the U.S.-led oil embargo imposed on Japan in the summer of 1941. Together with Great Britain and the Netherlands, the United States put Japan in an economic stranglehold in an attempt to force Japanese troops out of China. After negotiations with the U.S. for a political solution failed, Japan foolishly resorted to a military one.

The resulting war was catastrophic for Japan. The Japanese learned a lesson which, one would hope, they will never forget. The United States, in fact, tried to assure the world that Japan would never again emerge as a military power by imposing on the Japanese a ''peace constitution,'' which renounces forever the use of force.

With U.S. encouragement, Japan has developed a ''Self-defense Force'' in the postwar years, but on the whole the Japanese are content with their ''peace constitution.'' So are their Asian neighbors who were victims of Japanese military aggression and occupation.

Public opinion polls in Japan indicate that the majority of Japanese have no wish to remove the constitutional ban on the use of force and the Japanese government should not have to apologize for a pacifist stance in world affairs.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.