Letters to the editor Feb. 22

Church Slough no-wake proposal

Some neighbors requested the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks to make a no-wake zone on Church Slough. Church Slough has dirt banks, which erode with every wave. Boat waves transmit far more force and at a greater height than wind-driven waves, making their impact far greater on the banks. Moreover, boat wakes are avoidable. Other nearby water bodies have rocky banks, which better withstand motorized waterplay. Church Slough should be respected by boaters going at reasonable speeds, minimizing their impact.

Fish, birds, mammals and reptiles inhabit Church Slough. They cannot thrive in mud; they need clean water. Turbidity increases as power boats and personal watercraft rip back and forth. That completely avoidable muddiness comes from soil washed from the slough banks.

The land belongs to the private landowners. Washing away their property violates their rights. The water belongs to the state of Montana: all Montanans. Every Montanan’s interest in the water of Church Slough is diminished by heedless recreationalists. Perhaps those thrill seekers and sensualists have a right to their fun. But their right only goes so far as it does not impinge on the rights of others, such as the property rights of landowners and the water rights of Montana.

Regardless of people’s dubious rights to pleasure, Montana and the landowners are certainly suffering from destructive boating practices.

But those seeking to protect the land and water aren’t killjoy, rich people who want it to be wilderness. These people are neighbors. Good neighbors don’t tear up each other’s stuff. Good neighbors respect each other and prevent pollution from bothering one another. Your neighbors deserve your respect.

Give them a break, make no wake.

— Sam Louden, Kalispell

Controversial books

In his Feb. 7 letter to the editor, Steve Nordi ended his letter with reference to Genesis 19:30-35 which discretely tells the story of the incestuous sex of two daughters with their father resulting in two pregnancies, the resulting son of one who was the father of the Moabites and the other the father of the Ammonites.

Nowhere in this passage are there “bad” words, just a basic simple description of behavior that any adult would recognize. Even though incestuous sex was not yet forbidden, it is understood that Lot would not have participated had he been sober. Also, the daughters acted in the interest of continuing the family line and not out of lust. In the preceding chapters, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of the citizens’ blatant homosexual acts.

Genesis is a condensed history of the times before the beginnings of Israel (Exodus). Nowhere are there disgusting details of sinful acts, just simple descriptions of what happened.

This is in stark contrast to the controversial books many people want to be banned from the library. Those books not only condone homosexual behavior but celebrate it and promote it. I haven’t checked, But I’ll bet the library doesn’t have a good collection of vintage “Playboy” or “Hustler” magazines.

Let me end my letter with an appropriate Bible verse: “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Jesus in Matthew 18:6.

— Gary Goers, Kalispell