Good News is bad news for kids...

Good News is bad news for kids

I would like to respond to the letters claiming that a religious

club in a public school is just what kids need (Coastline Pilot,

Sept. 24).

The authors may be correct that it is now legal to have religious

clubs on our school campuses because the current Supreme Court has

deemed it so. So too was it legal to keep and sell slaves,

discriminate against blacks and other minorities in employment and

public accommodations, deny women the right to vote and to put

Japanese Americans in internment camps. That does not make the

Supreme Court right, nor does it make it consistent with traditional

American values.

I’m sure that these families are full of wonderful people with

good morals and good intentions, just like most Hare Krishnas or

fundamentalist Muslims or whatever religion you might think of.

Let’s face the facts, the reason the Good News evangelical group

wants to hold meetings on public school campuses instead of their own

private schools, churches or community centers is so that they can

have access to our young, impressionable children. One of their major

admitted goals is to proselytize and convert our children; all you

need to do is check them out on the Internet and you will see their

goals.

The fact that Katy Crumley thinks that it is wonderful that the

opportunity for “our elementary children to learn the great truths of

God ... “ is all the more reason for great concern. It is a slippery

slope, indeed. Evangelical Christians are not the only religious

groups that maintain as a core goal the recruitment of young people.

So too do the Scientologists, the Moonies and Heaven’s Gate. Do we

truly want our public schools to become arenas for all religions to

recruit our children? While the Good News Club may not be the same as

David Koresh or Jim Jones, we must all agree that it is not legal for

our public schools to decide which religions get access to our school

facilities and children and which do not. If we’ve learned nothing

else from the events of Sept. 11, and the current situation in

Afghanistan, Iraq, and many parts of the world, it’s that the wall of

separation between government and religion should remain inviolate.

Otherwise, we are subject to religion/government hybrids like the

Taliban encouraging people to engage in suicide attacks against

others, all in the name of their particular god.

Whatever way you look at it, the Good News Club is bad news for

our public schools.

ELIZABETH ANSELL

Laguna Beach

Wow! Judging from the mailbag last week, many parents (at least

three mothers) favor elementary school after-school Bible studies.

I would favor them too if the children were mature enough to

comprehend the meaning of such a profound book. But young minds are

capable of just so much. That’s why elementary school students are

not registered to vote or licensed to operate motor vehicles. A few

warm and fuzzy Bible stories and songs, totally out of context to the

much greater portion of less comforting Bible stories, do not a Bible

study make.

It is a disingenuous attempt to snag children’s hearts and minds

before their emotions and intellects are developed. Dirty pool!

The Good News Club may be constitutional, but it’s dishonest. That

itself sets a bad example. Why can’t they wait until children are

mature enough to take on the whole Bible, warts and all?

NIKO THERIS

Laguna Beach

Village Entrance was logical solution

We have an ugly Maintenance Yard in the very heart of Downtown.

The estimated cost to move it to Act V was once estimated by our

city manager to be $5 million. A current cost estimate could easily

be double that original out-of-date cost estimate. The City Council

has already expended a large sum of money for a design contest for

the Village Entrance Project. The winning design concept included a

parking structure for 400 cars and would house the Maintenance Yard.

Why has our City Council not instructed our city manager to proceed

further with this project ?

Instead, the council has voted to waste millions of taxpayer

dollars (money that could be used toward the Village Entrance

Project) to move only a part of the Maintenance Yard to Act V. Our

city manager has said that the ugly “tin shacks” will remain after

the rest of the facility is moved to Act V, so what will be

accomplished to clean up this eyesore in our midst ?

The aesthetics, economics and logic of this expensive move escape

me.

The ugliness remains. We will have delayed the building of the

Village Entrance Project (by who knows how long) by diverting

millions to moving only a part of the Maintenance Yard. We will gain

some 190 parking spaces at the current Maintenance Yard while we will

lose nearly that many peripheral parking spaces at Act V. Is this

progress toward the solution of traffic and parking problems?

The city needs to retain all of the present peripheral parking

spaces at Act V to help to eliminate cars from our streets. It was

proven this past summer that visitors will use Act V and ride our

colorful free trams into town. The city desperately needs the

additional 400 parking spaces that would be provided by the very

concept design of the Village Entrance Project that has already been

accepted by the council.

The city needs to move ahead with the Village Entrance Project by

canning the very expensive move to Act V. Such action would clean up

the eye sore of the Maintenance Yard, provide a huge net gain in

parking spaces and retain a peripheral parking system that works to

keep visitors’ cars off of our crowded streets. By moving ahead with

the Village Entrance Project and canning the very expensive Act V

move the city could better utilize taxpayers’ dollars.

It is urgent that Laguna address our traffic and parking problems

with logic. I guess this is just too logical. Maybe we need a new

City Council.

DON KNAPP

Laguna Beach

Candidates’ history tells the real story

For the Fall 2003 Festival of Arts board election, then Festival

President Bruce Rasner sent out a mailing to festival members.

Councilwoman Cheryl Kinsman and then Festival of Arts Vice-President

John Campbell were listed prominently under “We Support Bruce Rasner

for the Festival of Arts Board.” Kinsman is running for re-election

to the Laguna Beach City Council and Campbell for the Festival Board.

Although well intentioned, they both should be replaced.

As vice president, Campbell chaired the Festival of Arts Nov. 12,

2003 meeting where it was announced that Rasner received 293 votes in

his re-election effort. The slate led by long-serving board member

David Young won overwhelmingly with Young receiving 1,115 votes,

Anita Mangels and Carolyn Reynolds 984 votes each. At the meeting,

Campbell noted Young asked him to join the board. Young interrupted

him and said it was the worst mistake he had ever made.

I do appreciate the time and effort Kinsman and Campbell donate to

our community, however, I seriously question their judgment. They

supported Rasner during and after:

* witnessing his secretive and abrasive leadership style as

Festival of Arts President;

* hiring Executive Director Steve Brezzo for $175,000;

* managing the festival and pageant as a corporation to increase

revenues to the greatest degree; and

* pursuing licensing the Pageant of the Masters to other venues

even though specifically in conflict with the new 40-year lease with

the city

Kinsman and Campbell supported this vision for Laguna Beach and

the Festival of Arts. Unbelievably, plans included covering the

Irvine Bowl for a cost of $4.4 million. Due to their poor judgment,

Kinsman and Campbell should be replaced.

GENE FELDER

Laguna Beach

Campbell did no more than others

In reading the campaign literature of John Campbell, in his effort

for re-election to the Board of Directors for the Festival of Arts, I

find it quite difficult to understand what the other board members

were doing while Campbell was so busy overseeing our construction

program, lease negotiations, insurance program, keeping the festival

in Laguna and, most importantly, performing the duties of a board

member.

Campbell, as a board member, had certain duties for which he was

responsible.

He accepted his proper responsibilities.

DAVID YOUNG

Laguna Beach

Festival of Arts Board of

Directors member

Pearson still has questions to answer

My letter did not accuse Councilwoman Elizabeth Pearson of

receiving the gift of a ride in a limousine to Beverly Hills, but it

did question her motivation as to why she would bother to travel all

that way as a favor to the Athens/Montage people (“Pearson needs to

see the real problem,” Coastline Pilot, Sept. 10). My question remains unanswered.

She continues to miss the point of ethics here. As a taxpayer, and

a constituent, I expect council members to represent me, my needs and

my quality of life, not just the wants and desires of developers who

do not -- save for a few employees -- even vote, live, or raise their

children in this community. Pearson reminds us of the 55% vote in

favor of Montage, but has she forgotten her responsibility to the

other 45%, nearly half of the rest of Laguna Beach voters, who voted

no on Montage and now see another Montage project looming in Aliso

Creek that they don’t want?

CHARLOTTE MASARIK

Laguna Beach

* The Coastline Pilot is eager to run your letters. If you would

like to submit a letter, write to us at P.O. Box 248, Laguna Beach,

CA 92652; fax us at (949) 494-8979; or send e-mail to

coastlinepilot@latimes.com. Please give your name and include your

hometown and phone number, for verification purposes only.