Re: Future I-5 landmark: Senator Douglas J. Ericksen Bridge?
If an eponymous landmark is intended to evoke and otherwise convey the symbolic legacy of the recipient, a bridge should be absolutely the last such totem for the senator.
No disrespect intended for the deceased Mr. Ericksen, but I'd suggest the following more apropos alternative: How about the Sen. Douglas J. Ericksen Swamp?
From the people who voice objections to this proposed shelter, one rarely detects a scent of Christian compassion for the unfortunate people for whom this project would provide some shelter. People who are homeless are no more evil or dangerous than any other segment of our population. They simply don't have enough money to provide themselves with housing. Have you not noticed how high rents are in our community? And, they generally don't have reliable access to medical and dental care. Do some of them have mental health issues? Of course they do. So do many of our well-housed neighbors. However, the former are more likely to lack access to care.
Do some of the homeless have drug and alcohol problems? Of course they do. But, there are just as many drug and alcohol issues among the rest of us. Different drugs, perhaps. And pricier booze, obviously. Do some of the homeless commit crimes? Of course. But, so do some of the well-to-do. Ah, but that is “white-collar” crime.
Fraud, a white-collar crime, is far more commonplace than you would imagine. However, it is rarely prosecuted because it is too much work for stressed-out prosecutors' offices. The wealthy just “fudge” their Schedule Cs on their federal tax returns or fail to report all their professional income. Or overcharge their customers.
Yes, the difference between the homeless and those of us more fortunate is basically that they have much, much less money than do we. But, being poor should not be a crime! Rather, their poverty ought more often to be viewed as our shame. We do not all grow up with equal opportunities. Or, hadn't you noticed?
In this year of primaries and midterm elections, before we start hearing about voter fraud and fixed elections, it’s time to look at voting from a different perspective.
The science of quantum physics has proven that everything is made up of energy. You, the words you speak, the kindness you share, the animals, the plants, the soil, our water — everything is made of energy. That goes for your home, your possessions, even the money in your pocket; everything is energy.
Isn’t it time we ask ourselves, ‘How am I spending my energy? Who and what actions am I supporting when I shop?’ As Donna Starr reminded us in her letter about colonialism, ‘Follow the money,’ why wait until an election year? We can vote every day with our hearts and our wallets.
I greatly appreciate the discussion through letters to CDN by Eric Hirst and Fred Likkel. If, as suggested, farmers have fully embraced water efficiency, that is great news! I’d love to hear more about those specific farms that are leading the way because, as precious and in-demand as (Nooksack River) water is, efficiency is essential.
Whatcom County is moving away from fossil fuels toward cleaner, more sustainable energy sources. This is a good thing. The hard part is that many homeowners will be hard-pressed to afford the necessary investments. We are fortunate to have a solar panel manufacturer right here in Whatcom County, but they are costly. Wanting to do the right thing and being able to are two separate things, and in our current economy, it's a difficult stretch.
Our elected representative Sharon Shewmake has written House Bill 1814, which passed this year. This bill provides for “community solar projects,” which use tax credits to allow working-class people to get the benefits of cheap solar energy. Sustainable energy should be available for all, and Sharon Shewmake has made it happen! Leaders like Sharon, actually working for the good of regular people, deserve our commendation. She’s crafted a bill that actually helps our economy, the environment and families.
It is my belief that beauty lifts spirits and ugliness crushes them, so who decided to make the design of the new Lighthouse Mission building as ugly as possible? Was that because it will service poor homeless people who they think don't deserve any beauty anyway?
Send Letters to the Editor to email@example.com. Rules: Maximum 300 words, have a point and make it clearly, no personal attacks. Include your full name, address and telephone number(s) for verification; only your name and city of residence will be published. Letters may be edited for length, grammar and clarity.