Letters | Ally, not asexual

none | Boulder Weekly

Ally, not asexual

(Re: “Homosexuality in history,” cover story, June 30.) “A” in “LGBTQIA” is for “asexual?!” I think not! It means “ally,” BW, and refers to those of us straight folks who are allied with the cause of equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity … all those other letters in the acronym.

Lori Buss/via Internet

Circumcision revisited

The article “To cut or not to cut?” (Uncensored, June 23) left out two extremely vital pieces of information. First, many men suffer from an “oversensitive gland,” commonly referred to as premature ejaculation. This is a problem for millions of men. It disrupts normal healthy sex, deprives women of satisfaction and interferes with healthy sexual relationships. Just ask the many doctors who own and/or work in male sex clinics around the United States (and there are many such clinics). This is not one of those problems that gets discussed openly, and is a painful discussion for men to have even in the privacy of the doctor’s office. The very notion that all men need or want greater sensitivity, as postulated by the author, is blatantly false and a serious mischaracterization of the reality of male sexuality.

Second, every day, adult men undergo adult circumcision for medical reasons. Did the author ever think to research studies regarding those men and if they enjoyed sex any less post circumcision?

The very notion that circumcised men could be “missing out” is absurd. All one has to do is check the facts or interview the doctors who daily treat patients in male sex clinics. Finally, the statement, “Without the foreskin, the glans slowly becomes keratinized, with the skin growing thicker and tougher …” is simply untrue. Just ask any circumcised male or any urologist. Please get the facts straight.

Craig Zalk/Reston, Va.

Pamela White responds: I did my research and stand by the column. The No Circ movement is powered largely by circumcised men and includes nurses and doctors.

Skatepark positives

(“Skatepark skulduggery,” News, June 23.) Next article you write about the Lafayette skatepark, maybe mention the camps that are sold out, the Element contest held at the park, which was a food drive for homeless shelters, or the winner of that contest, who went on to win the finals in California and a full sponsorship.

Every incident mentioned has happened and happens at every skatepark.

The difference is Lafayette has an amazing park (kids don’t go out of their way to Longmont’s park, trust me) and it’s next to the police station and rec center. That can’t be said about the Boulder park.

And seriously, reporting a board stolen after you left it at a park overnight doesn’t count. Ever hear police reports of a glove stolen from a baseball field after it was left overnight?

Me neither. A positive follow-up would be nice.

Patrick O’Toole/via Internet

Rein in defense department

With the Independence Day festivities and budget talks occurring nearly simultaneously this year, we need to do our homework and think about what has happened since the beginning of the new millennium.

Our spending has to be addressed along with the wisdom of the methods of “providing for the common defense,” as per our Constitution. Too many lawmakers and Americans have given the defense department a pass and ignored the fact that the budget for “defense” has doubled since 2000, from $350 billion to more than $750 billion per year, and, not coincidentally, the role of the private sector (that has to allow for a profit to exist) has taken an ever-larger piece of the pie. Even the generals involved in the decision-making process have been quoted as objecting to certain expenditures as bloated and unnecessary.

That’s why the defense department needs to be on the table just as all other departments, ensuring “domestic tranquility” and promoting “the general welfare,” again, as per our Constitution.

True, there are animals of the human persuasion that for reasons of faith or reasons of profit and greed need to be kept at bay and executed if necessary to ensure worldwide general welfare and ensure the tranquility of peace-loving and law-abiding citizens everywhere.

There are ways to accomplish that goal without enabling the wicked in the quest to “destroy the Great Satan,” as was the animal named bin Laden’s wish.

Take his demise as a perfect example. With advanced technologies and weaponry paid for by U.S. taxpayers, and the “black budgets” (not included in the defense department figure), it was possible to pinpoint the location, get a small force in and do the job of eliminating Osama bin Laden. Just like President Obama promised.

Did we get him? Was it necessary to start a very expensive war to “accomplish the mission”?

Americans now know the answers. If we really want to honor our founding fathers, let’s do some reading and find out what they envisioned for future generations of Americans. The fact is that Thomas Jefferson himself was adamantly opposed to keeping standing armies during peacetime, and we know why. War is expensive. Armies are expensive.

Feeding and providing housing, health care and needs to troops and their families, while necessary during war, are still expensive. With new technologies and well-trained, well-armed outfits like SEAL Team 6, we can provide the security necessary to accomplish what all the founding fathers wanted for America without breaking the budget (which Osama bin Laden wanted, just as he did to the U.S.S.R.). We can retain American respect and standing in today’s world and still give America the security, compassion and sensibilities envisioned by America’s heroes.

The only certainty in life is change, and unless we change as well, we will cease to exist. Let’s work together and be smart while we’re at it.

God Bless America. Tommy Holeman/Niwot

Corporate personhood

(Re: “We the corporations,” cover story, May 19.) I was at first skeptical about the chances of a movement to amend the United States Constitution to deny corporate personhood for purposes of constitutional rights and to determine that unlimited corporate contributions are not to be equated with free speech rights (Move to Amend). Amending the United States Constitution is necessarily a grudging task. However, I believe the founding fathers of our nation would have wanted provisions in the Constitution to avoid the tyranny of unlimited corporate spending in our elections as sanctioned by our United States Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission.

The Boulder City Council is considering whether to place a referendum on the November ballot supporting an amendment to the United States Constitution to overturn the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United. Many say that this would merely be a symbolic gesture by the City Council. However, in light of the pervasiveness of corporate influence in today’s elections at the national, state and local levels, this issue affects us all here in Boulder County on a daily basis. Until legislators are willing to support major campaign and election reforms to legislatively overrule Citizens United, corporations will continue to wield undue influence in our elections. As we know, many advertisements paid for by “soft” money are anything but informative and in many cases outright lies without any accountability.

The Grassroots Action Team of the Boulder County Democratic Party is sponsoring a rally in support of the Move to Amend at the Municipal Building in Boulder starting at 4:30 p.m. on July 19. The Boulder City Council will take public comment on a proposed referendum during their meeting on that date. Contact your councilperson to support this measure. Plan to attend the rally and council meeting to demonstrate your support.

Dominick M. Saia/Louisville

Boulder Weekly welcomes your e-mail correspondence. Letters must not exceed 400 words and should include your name, address and telephone number for verification. Addresses will not be published. We do not publish anonymous letters or those signed with pseudonyms. Letters become the property of Boulder Weekly and will be published on our website. Send letters to: letters@boulderweekly.com. Look for Boulder Weekly on the World Wide Web at: www.boulderweekly. com.