WW welcomes letters to the editor via mail, e-mail or fax. Letters must be signed by the author and include the author's street address and phone number for verification. Preference will be given to letters of 250 words or less. Thanks... The story you wrote about Marcia really touched me ["Marcia Hood-Brown," May 26, 1999]. I am a recovering addict and have been clean for almost three years. I personally never tried heroin, but I can really relate to the story. Too many people are dying from this disease. I work in the field, managing a drug- and alcohol-free building in downtown Portland, and I see it happen a lot. This disease strips people from everyday things. It takes away our friends, our family, our jobs, our homes, our children, our self-esteem and our self-worth, and eventually it takes away our life. We usually die alone. We really need to somehow make the public aware that it affects all of us from all walks of life. We also need to send a message that we do recover. I personally know a lot of recovering heroin addicts with long-term clean time, and I know hundreds who are recovering. Thank you for sharing Marcia's story. I can almost promise you that somewhere out there someone read that and it planted a seed and it's going to benefit them. Jessie Mineau North Halleck Street ...And Thanks Again Thank you for a brilliant and personally understood story of what heroin is--an equal-opportunity employer ["Marcia Hood-Brown," May 26, 1999]. Maybe it will help other addicts to reach out. Who knows? But thank you for a good, good story. Maybe it's because I've walked down that street myself. I'm now going down a different road. Cathy Crose Northwest 21st Avenue The Lost War on Drugs I've just finished reading your well-written and poignant account of the tragic death of Marcia Hood-Brown ["Marcia Hood-Brown," May 26, 1999]. It, together with the amazing statistics on Portland's heroin deaths since 1989, underscores the fact that there has been an amazing increase in the illegal market for heroin over the past several years. This is a phenomenon which is worldwide in scope and which I think has been assiduously blacked out by our ONDCP, the drug czar's office and, as such, the chief shill for our disastrous program of drug prohibition. Tom O'Connell San Mateo, Calif. Whose Family Values? WW recently joined the fight to "save" marriage from the evil clutches of same-sex domestic partnership ["Same-Sex Marriage," WW, June 9, 1999], but they've got at least one reader crying foul to their bizarre, neoconservative point of view. Gays in Oregon get a fortunate break from the courts in Oregon, and WW comes along and calls the resulting state of affairs "absurd," "kooky" and a "mess." They declare that what we need to do now is "save" marriage, but one wonders what marriage there is to save. The kind between one man and one woman, which is the only marriage I know of in the last (how many?) centuries? People's conception of marriage has been changing over time. One hundred years ago, for instance, many marriages were consummated more for practical reasons or socioeconomic considerations than for love. Men probably looked for women who they thought could best take care of the chores. Is this the state of affairs that WW wants to return to? If marriage has changed in the past, it can keep changing, and maybe gays, straights and bisexuals can work together to find creative family and living arrangements to further transform our ideas and our values about what a "marriage" really is, and what a "family" is as well. Maybe then we can talk politics. WW's reasons for supporting gay marriage are, to coin a phrase, "about as creative as oatmeal." Their editorial is a good example of how conservative yuppies can hide behind a liberal facade. Jeff Kerr Northeast Portland Call Me Old-Fashioned... This is a response to your editorial discussing the inequities in state health benefits to unmarried couples ["Same-Sex Marriage," June 9, 1999]. Although I could expound on any number of issues raised in the piece, I chose to focus on a couple of conclusions you made. My point of contention is with your comment that the legal recognition of same-sex unions is the "only way around the mess Tanner has created for us." There is another option: Repeal the Tanner decision and only extend health benefits to the spouses of state workers. You assumed that the extension of health benefits to the partners of homosexual employees was correct. Perhaps it's not. I point out the comment you make that "gays deserve the same rights as heterosexuals." This is true; all people deserve the same inalienable rights given to us by our creator. Nevertheless, God did not say, "Thou shalt have health benefits." The extension of health benefits to spouses is a privilege granted by the state in recognition of two people becoming one in the union of marriage. Although we must extend to all people the same rights, that does not require an extension of the same privileges. You cannot force people to accept homosexuality as normal and therefore on an equal footing with heterosexuality. There are many people who still believe that homosexuality is a sexually deviant behavior that should be "therapized," not normalized. You do not have to be a homophobe to think this way; rational, compassionate people like me simply do not believe in the normalization of homosexuality. Call me old-fashioned, but I think that the marriage of a man and a woman is something very special. But that's just my humble opinion. Brian C. Malcom Vancouver, Wash. Who's Misleading Who? H.V. Claytor Jr's latest article ["The Art of Storytellin'," WW, June 9, 1999] nakedly displays his narrow-minded and even racist view of the hip-hop world and would have us believe that it's exclusively limited to black people and, in Portland, those living only in inner North and Northeast. Granted that black folk have dominated the microphone in rap (and I'm not complaining), they are not a majority in the bigger picture of hip-hop: breakers, graffiti-writers, producers and especially the hip-hop DJ. I live, breathe, listen and practice every element of hip-hop, but I don't buy into status symbols propagated through the mainstream (c)rap Claytor promotes. Why not just call it "rap" and leave the rest of us not interested in racism to keep on rocking hip-hop. The small, local element he does focus on is good, but it's not the whole picture. Hip-hop thrives on diversity, and it's foolish to exclude non-black people. We're not out to disrespect or re-appropriate it, as Claytor fears, but to add to it, keep it growing. I also give props to local hip-hop, but Claytor putting them alongside Puff and the like borders on insulting. It's Claytor who's done the most disrespect to local hip-hop. Hip-hop has been coming together strong the last few years, and when I see the rap on TV, it's very hard to agree with Claytor's saying that cliquishness helped keep it true to its ghetto roots. Millionaire rap stars represent the ghetto? Claytor Junior, you a fool, nah'mean? Tu Tran Southeast 37th Avenue Death By Natural Causes I don't think you can credit "filmgoer inertia" for the closing of the Clinton Street Theatre ["The Last Picture Show," WW, June 9, 1999]. The sound system was awful, the films often broke or jammed partway through, bulbs in the projector regularly blew out and the springs poked through the worn-out seats (once tearing my jeans, for which they reimbursed me). I kept coming back because no place else showed the films they did, but each time I swore I'd never return because of all the problems. The Clinton Street Theatre has no one to blame but itself. Arline Jacobson Southeast Taylor Street Bicycle-Friendly City? It's not just art that's threatened by the project to remove the Lovejoy Ramp ["Urban Mythology," WW, June 16, 1999]. The proposed project will make it much more dangerous to ride a bike. Shame on the City of Portland. The Bicycle Transportation Alliance fought long and hard to get the minimal bike lanes on the Lovejoy Ramp today. While less than optimal, these lanes are still heavily used because Lovejoy is the best route between east and west. The city's plan eliminates the eastbound bike lanes that currently exist. Are cyclists supposed to sprout wings and fly? Eastbound cyclists will have to share a single traffic lane with rail tracks (for the new streetcar) and thousands of cars. There is plenty of room for bike lanes in the street right of way, but the city seems to think that car parking is more important than the safety of bicycle-riding people. This city is breaking Oregon's landmark "Bicycle Law" (requiring cities and counties to put in bikeways when roads are built or rebuilt) as well as ignoring its own Bicycle Master Plan. So much for bicycle-friendly Portland. Rex Burkholder Northeast 11th Avenue Give Reed A Chance I commend WW and Nigel Jaquiss for being brave enough to let actual high-school students make statements about themselves in a public forum ["The Graduates," June 16, 1999]. So often it's easier to just rest comfortably on our preconceptions, and I hadn't remembered in years what it feels like to be in high school. Those kids are smart and sharp. Now, how about giving Reedies the same chance? As I recall, in the past year Reed College and Reed students have been the target of WW in a none too subtle or skillful way. The glee with which your reporter said "Welcome to the real world, Reed" is something I shan't soon forget. A little jealous, maybe? Or perhaps your apparent fondness for exposing biased reporting does not extend to your own reporting on one of the West's best colleges. I'd be glad to give you the names of five Reedies who'd gladly turn you on your collective ear for ya. Bianca Salerno Southeast 28th Avenue Editor's Note: For what it's worth, two Reed alumni are members of our news staff. Willing Taxpayer Thanks for your outstanding cover story "The Other Face of Tri-Met" [June 23, 1999]. The story could have been titled "The Other Face of Contracting out Government Services to the Lowest Bidder." Contracting transportation services to non-union shops who hire convicted felons may save a few tax dollars in the short run, but the public end up paying for it in the long run. As a leader of the campaign against Tri-Met's billion-dollar light-rail boondoggle, I must admit that I would be only too happy to part with a few extra tax dollars to ensure that persons with disabilities are not being transported by convicted killers. Lewis Marcus North Syracuse Street - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Willamette Week | originally published June 30, 1999