City churches should take to the streets to help combat...


August 18, 1998

City churches should take to the streets to help combat crime

Thank you for publishing the informative column by Clarence Page "Taking the church to the streets reduces Boston's homicide rate." I only wish it had been on the front page for city leaders, clergyman, police and city dwellers to consider the facts it presented.

The statistics testify that this area of Boston "dropped to only one juvenile homicide per year from more than a hundred per year." What is the secret? Simply bringing the churches back to the streets and unifying forces with the mayor, probation officers and police.

Why does this simplistic, low-budget strategy work? When you're lonely, scared or in trouble, shouldn't there be an alternative presence other than the drug dealer to go for aid? The city and suburban churches need to stand firm and be in the center of the social and political arena, but they need to be firmly supported by city leadership.

Doubters need to study the statistics that tell the story of God's power and love.

Jean A. Jacobs


President is only human, his scandal is not treason

The most important thing to remember is that the president is a man. If we were held to the same scrutiny, I wonder how many of us could handle it as well.

The real truth behind the Lewinsky matter is that Mr. Clinton has done too much (as viewed by some) for minorities, and people have vowed to try and destroy him. Mr. Clinton has made many powerful people unhappy.

The president has not committed treason, he has not had persons break into outside offices to steal documents, he has not started a war in another country and he has not turned a deaf ear to America's cities.

Cameron E. Miles


Arts & Society section does not make the grade

What a disappointment the Arts & Society section of the Sunday edition of The Sun has been. Where is the improved and expanded coverage that was promised when you discontinued publication of The Evening Sun and reformatted your newspaper?

"The street game" (Aug. 9) is an interesting article, but how can you justify giving it most of the front page as well as the entire middle spread of the Arts & Society section?

Other than routine coverage of films, books and television, the less than half-page article on Jerome Robbins was the only other article remotely associated with the arts.

It's ludicrous that you publish personals -- women and men seeking companionship of the same or opposite sex -- in Arts & Society. Place them in the Classified section if, in fact, they belong at all in a family newspaper.

The Sun does a superlative job of investigative reporting. Why don't you focus on bringing your coverage of the arts up to the standards of a major metropolitan newspaper?

Robert S. Gist


Distractions don't ruin Gettysburg's attraction

I am writing in response to Kevin Cowherd's column ("Tourism's relentless march on Gettysburg," July 30) about his recent trip to Gettysburg. While I agree with Mr. Cowherd that the commercial encroachments on the Civil War battlefield are a detraction as well as a distraction, one can choose to ignore the periphery and appreciate the military park with minimal cost.

The museum at the visitors center is free. The National Park Service runs a wide array of free programs throughout the day during the summer. Recently, my family took advantage of several of these presentations, and they were excellent.

If you do elect to take a two-hour tour of a Civil War battlefield, it seems logical to expect to hear about slaughter and devastation and the effects of weaponry because these were paramount issues of the war.

If Mr. Cowherd cares to tour the battlefield again, there is a men's room located conveniently at the visitors center and one gift shop, which is an extraordinary book store. But next time he might want to consider a trip to the beach.

Linda S. Trout

Etters, Pa.

Using other outlet's sources undermines your reliability

A front-page article by Susan Baer ("Lewinsky testifies to encounters," Aug. 7) reported the following: "testifying for six hours, Lewinsky told of numerous sexual encounters with the president inside the White House, according to the Associated Press, which cited an unnamed legal source familiar with her testimony."

In my view, this is irresponsible reporting, worthy of one of the trash magazines as prevalent today. Your reporter doesn't cite what she was told by a source, but what was told to someone else by an unknown person.

Is it any wonder that people don't trust the media, even old, established papers such as The Sun?

When a reporter uses an unnamed source, shouldn't he or she at least have an idea of that person's reliability? Of course. Simply saying the AP reported this is not sufficient. Next you will be citing CNN and the Boston Globe as reliable.

Thomas H. German


Doctors know best cure for teen-age smoking

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.