Due to the weather, some customers may experience late delivery of The Roanoke Times. We apologize for the delay.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Cuccinelli benefits from energy conflict
The Ken Cuccinelli campaign ad about the war on coal states that the war on coal hurts the working poor. Does this mean that the coal industry does not pay a living wage?
If the coal industry does not pay a living wage, why would anyone want to defend it? Maybe it is time to replace the coal industry with one that will pay a living wage so the employees will have something else to look forward to other than a life of poverty.
In reality, the war on coal is more of a competition coal is facing from other energy sources, mainly natural gas. The coal industry is losing market share to natural gas because of the abundance of natural gas and its cost.
The plentiful supply of natural gas and its price has caused industries to switch from coal to natural gas, as we have heard in the local news recently. What the politicians say and do has little effect on the coal industry. It is economics.
It has been alleged that Cuccinelli has received a contribution from the gas company, coal’s competition, for $100,000. He must also have received contributions from the coal companies since he is also championing their cause.
Cuccinelli is trying to have it both ways. As Cuccinelli must know, you can’t serve two masters.
JOHN E. VanLUIK
Religion can be a tool that divides
In “Religious views should be in the open” (Sept. 26 letter), Gail Lambert suggests the Constitution doesn’t prohibit employees of tax-supported entities from leading prayers at public functions, but she doesn’t provide her credentials in constitutional law.
At a minimum, religious activities sponsored by tax-supported entities are a bad idea because they disenfranchise some portion of the population.
Several years ago, I was the volunteer accompanist of a large choir at a public high school. Before every concert, the choir director told students to hold hands while she gave a Christian prayer, ignoring the fact that not all choir members were Christian or even religious. She might as well have said, “If you’re not a Christian, you’re not really a member of this choir.”
I thought the prayer was inappropriate but didn’t complain — which I now regret — because my children were students at the school. I didn’t want to make things difficult for them.
Lambert and others like her aren’t satisfied with the religious freedom we enjoy in this country, and want religion in every aspect of life, even if the religious freedom of others is violated. This attitude is a sign of zealotry.
Weather JournalMany very icy despite 'bust' claims