(Re: “Sex vs. cell phones,” In Case You Missed It, Oct. 15.) I read the snippet on “sex vs. cell phones” and wanted to point out that for many people cell phones are major avenues for foreplay. Having completed my dissertation on electronic intimacy, I can scientifically state that many people, especially those under 30, use their cell phones as the primary approach to connect both sexually and emotionally. While men can be buttered up with the bootie call sex-text, a woman’s source of sexual desire often lies in the mind. With the right digital fingering, texting turns into an electronic version of a dozen romantic roses. Next time Samsung Mobile should do a study on sex and cell phones.
Dr. Jenni Skyler/Boulder
Gang of 4C
(Re: “The gloves come off,” cover story, Oct. 1.) It seems that everyone keeps missing the point about Project LifeBridge, the Gang of 4C developers, and Councilwoman [Karen] Benker. By writing this letter, I am sure that I will be accused of being anti-Christian. That would not be true. It is untrue when it is said about Ms. Benker. She is a life-long Christian and someone who gives generously of her time to do good works in this community. Thankfully, Benker stood up to the royal elite of this town: the developers, the Longmont Times-Call and the “old money,” when very few others would. In her lone vote against the LifeBridge annexation, she clearly expressed her view that this would not be good for the city. I believe this was based on a fiscal analysis of the various costs to the city, vis-a-vis the overblown projections of the actual benefits from the Gang of 4C. In spite of her objections, The Project LifeBridge steamroller passed our rubber stampin’ City Council by a vote of 6-1.
Here is where the most important part of all this gets left out. I would say this is intentional by the alleged journalists in the Longmont paper. The citizens of Longmont stood up! More than 6,000 registered voters signed a petition and overturned the Longmont City Council for the first time in its history. This was a great moment for the democratic process and should never be forgotten or dismissed.
The propaganda machine would have us believe that this was a gathering of all the Christian haters in town. That would be a lie. The statistics show that in our country, a large majority of people identify themselves as being Christian. Most of the petitioners undoubtedly would share this identification. The alleged activist bloggers in our town would have us believe this is a secret attempt by “Reds” from Boulder to take over our fair city. This is also a lie that gets mindlessly repeated over and over. Most of the recent waves of peoples moving here don’t come from Boulder. They could never afford to live there in the first place.
[Stephanie] Baum’s blog is full of misplaced vitriol as well, and the chicken guy should be taken to task for mistaking William Wallace for the cartoon “braveheart.” The real Wallace would surely have taken the other side, with heads of the monarchy on the chopping block.
When the citizens of Longmont rose up against their council, they did the truly democratic (small d) thing. They asked for the annexation question to be put on the ballot. The Gang of 4C went along. What a better way to prove, once and for all, that they did belong in Longmont? However, they chickened out. The Gang of 4C withdrew from the ballot. Then comes the biggest lie of all. The Gang of 4C couldn’t work with the current City Council and were taking their ball and going home. But the City Council was already out of the way. This was between the developers and the people. It is as wrong to blame the City Council for the Gang of 4C running away, as it is wrong to blame them for the world economic collapse. Yet it seems that some people do.
I believe that religious freedom and free speech are the cornerstones of our republic. It is just sad to see them abused so consistently, and so obviously.
Deceit made pretty
As one with a master’s degree in mass communication research and more than 25 years of marketing experience, I write to warn my fellow Boulderites about the on-going Madison Avenue blitz. The Boulder Wall Street wanna-bes (the nextin-line developers, bankers, realtors, etc.) wish to cash in on the upcoming City Council election, and they’re hoping their slick advertising will sway or at least confuse enough of us to make the wrong choices come election day.
Part of their strategy is to appear as progressive as their opposition. For instance, the Boulder Outdoor Coalition website looks Madison Avenue-slick, that’s for sure. It has pretty pics of Boulder surroundings and even lists hyperlinks of other Boulder-based outdoor organizations, as if those groups were likewise endorsing development over conservation. Then under the guise of a few select “outdoor-friendly” phrases (like “Educate and Engage not Regulate and Exclude”), they’re hoping to deceive us into thinking their pro-development endorsements are somehow a good thing. Just the opposite, I can assure you.
Then consider the money to run slick ad campaigns. You know what they look like. The for-profit health insurance industry has spent hundreds of millions of dollars recently, trying to deceive us into thinking that they actually provide us with something of value beyond paperpushing and denying health care for their own profit.
It’s the same with the Boulder Wall Street wanna-bes: they think they can buy Boulder with their slick, misleading advertising. On Election Day, let them know that Boulder is not for sale. Instead, I urge you to vote progressively for thetrue community-caring candidates: Matt Appelbaum, Macon Cowles, Tim Plass, Jyotsna Raj, Valerie Mitchell.
W. Jerry Allen/Boulder
Teach Darwin’s other beliefs
(Re: “Evolution Revolution,” Buzz, Oct. 8) We are now in the bicentennial year of Charles Darwin’s birth in 1809, and next month will mark the 150th year since the initial publication of his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Both Darwin and his publications remain controversial, yet his theories are taught almost as sacred scripture in our government-run schools.
If we are to teach Darwin’s theories, we should teach more Darwin, not less. For example, his faulty methods of scientific observation led him to conclude that “women, though generally superior to men in moral qualities, are inferior intellectually…” (1882 letter to Caroline Kennard, emphasis mine). Darwin then followed up with his scientific observation: “Man is more courageous… and has a more inventive genius. His brain is absolutely larger…” (emphasis mine). In Chapter 19 of Descent of Man, scientist Darwin erroneously concluded that “Man has ultimately become superior to woman” (emphasis mine). Brilliant!
With regard to the topic of superior and inferior races, Darwin declared in a Feb. 6, 1862, letter to C. Kingsley that he had observed “a good many Barbarians and savage(s)… .” Darwin’s scientific predictions were: “It is very true what you say about the higher races of men, when high enough, replacing & clearing off the lower races. In 500 years how the Anglo- Saxon race will have spread & exterminated whole nations; & in consequence how much the Human race, viewed as a unit, will have risen in rank” (emphasis mine). His scientific prediction was that when his white Anglo-Saxon race killed off the “lower races,” the human race will have “risen in rank.” Brilliant!
Darwin’s racist and chauvinistic scientific theories should be taught in our schools along with Darwin’s other writings in order that all of his scientific and social theories may be more properly evaluated and understood. Let us bring the dark things to the light for frank examination. It would improve the critical thinking skills of our children.
I propose that instead of one Darwin Bicentennial Celebration, we have an annual “Darwinian Memorial,” fashioned after the annual Holocaust Memorial. After all, before Karl Marx’s ideas led to the death of tens of millions of people, Marx wanted to dedicate his book Das Kapital to Darwin, and Adolph Hitler considered Darwin’s ideas as giving scientific legitimacy to the Aryan race’s intended “rise in rank” through the extermination of a “lower” race. If our children are to be taught Darwinian theories, then the students should learn all, not a selected few, of Darwin’s scientific teachings — let us educate, not propagandize, our students.
Bert Robinson/Baton Rouge, La.