". . . the moral high ground should belong


In our hypocrisy-filled world, it is tempting to accord consistency a top spot on the morality charts, as does Roger Downey in "Fetus Fight?" (July 12). Yet the so-called "illiberal bad guys" fail even this test, in that they do not rail against the fertility clinics that store, and ultimately discard, the unneeded embryos. In their worldview, these clinics house freezers full of human beings. But where's their outrage? Conveniently, and inconsistently, sidestepped because of the clinics' role as embryo delivery devices [see cover story, this issue].

In any case, the moral high ground should belong to those who work to tease out the many-faceted ethical issues involved and seek to examine them in a clear light, not to those who find the shortest "consistent" route through the moral labyrinth the article ultimately addresses.

Leila Kipp

via e-mail


I realize that being hip sells, so you have to report on every little flourish of the gay community, most of them self-concerned. But your "Power Lesbians" [July 12] are not even token lesbians, they're sellouts. If anyone really thinks it was hard work for those power lesbians to sell massive development plans in the environment of a suddenly affluent, post-suburban populace or to saddle this theme park burg with legal intricacies rivaling the First Republic of the French Revolution, think again.

Just like the tyranny of the crass urban design, such as the structure over Pike Avenue which we now have to look at, there is something unsettling about being tyrannized by labels which are perceived as badges of immunity from analysis. Lesbians who fit into the tapestry of the power elite in our doctrinaire Camelot aren't unique, they're as prosaic as can be. Any passionate lesbian will find that her sex life improves dramatically the minute she gets out of the city of vain-glorious posturers.

Kim Daniels



Geov Parrish's tirade ("One Track Mind," July 12) against Sound Transit's light-rail project was kooky. By claiming that there is nothing to show for the money spent on the system so far, Parrish reveals his striking ignorance of how large projects get built. The money spent so far has been for environmental permitting, community reviews, design reviews, project engineering, and other such essentials. If we are going to build something that covers 20 miles of our city, surely we must plan it carefully, consider the environment, and make sure the engineering is solid.

The project is over budget, to be sure. But Parrish's monorail fantasy would require that we toss all this work, and go through an entirely new series of reviews, designs, and engineering with totally unproven technology. That would be a colossal waste of money and would take many years. Constructing the light-rail system would be cheap in comparison, and it would get us out of our transportation crunch much sooner than any conceivable monorail project.

Brendan Works



It would be easier to take Kathryn Robinson's reviews more seriously if I could believe that she actually knew anything about food. While she burbles over the "ingenuity" of risotto balls ["By the Numbers," July 12], Sicilians and Romans alike have enjoyed these "strange creatures" for generations, as arancini and suppli di riso, respectively.

Furthermore, a beignet with "the size and heft of [a] golf ball" is no beignet at all, but a doughnut hole. Allowing the chef some liberty with the size and shape of his breakfast pastry, a beignet should be light, puffy, and definitely not dense.

Although Ms. Robinson's charming enthusiasm is a boon to restaurant owners everywhere, her readers who actually have to pay for dinners out might prefer the praise to be leavened with a little judicious fact-checking.

Becca Offer



Nina Shapiro ("Omari's Grand Plan," News Clips, July 12) is the latest journalist to mis-report what happened at Omari Tahir-Garrett's preliminary hearing on Monday, July 9. I was standing next to Mr. Tahir-Garrett throughout that "hearing." He was brought out into the secure courtroom in shackles, which is virtually unheard of for someone held on investigation of second degree assault. It was as if everyone concerned had already decided that he would disrupt the proceedings violently. Perhaps that expectation, and the visual cues to the audience provided by the chains, explains the widespread mis-impression about what then unfolded.

Mr. Tahir-Garrett told Judge Eileen Kato that he wished to represent himself, at least initially. The judge agreed that he had a right to do so. He then began to make a motion to the court in a manner and tone of voice that was standard for a courtroom.

It was not the tone of his motion but its contents that seemed to prompt the reaction: He challenged the court's jurisdiction over him as a descendant of slaves and Native Americans, and requested that venue be transferred to a tribal court. He spoke for perhaps 20 seconds. He was immediately interrupted and then forcibly removed from the courtroom. He did not resist as he was dragged away.

It has been widely reported that Mr. Tahir-Garrett disrupted this hearing. Instead, he was summarily denied bail for a full day longer than court rules or the state constitution permit, simply because he attempted to speak, albeit unconventionally, on his own behalf in a court hearing. The Seattle Times attributed quotes to Mr. Tahir-Garrett (about Nazis and the KKK) that were actually shouted by members of the audience as he was yanked out of the courtroom. The Times has acknowledged the error now, but the damage has been done.

I have a better understanding of lynch mobs after watching the reporting that went on regarding this hearing.

Lisa Daugaard



To all those heterosexuals who wrote in to the Seattle Weekly to express their horror at a child being used on the cover of the Gay Pride (June 21) issue, I just have to say get over yourselves.

Every Valentine's Day I am inundated with greeting cards, postcards, and cutesy little pictures of some little boy and some little girl kissing, holding hands, or doing something assumedly heterosexual and of course beyond the sexual desire or necessity of a child. Who is crying about exploitation of children then? Where are you up in arms about exploitation or child soft pornography with that going on?

It's all comfortable with you when you assume someone's heterosexuality, but God forbid we make an equal assumption in the opposite direction because that would just be such a horrible attack on you, wouldn't it?

Please, it's not that big a deal, it's a picture; get over it.

Beau Burriola



Let me just say that I thought the cover of the Gay Pride issue [June 21] of your paper was perfectly sweet. It seems that your previous responders couldn't even imagine the light and happy side of being queer. Would that we could all be as innocent of hate and the fear of rejection as the kid on your cover obviously was! Darlings, gay life involves a lot more than adult-oriented material, it involves laughter, love, and wearing pretty things as well!



Fetuses! Are they funny? Write to Seattle Weekly, 1008 Western, Ste. 300, Seattle, WA 98104; fax to 206-467-4377; or e-mail to letters@seattleweekly.com. Please include name, location, and phone number. Letters may be edited.

comments powered by Disqus

Friends to Follow