Bill violates religious freedom of landlords

The Bible condemns homosexuality in clear, unequivocal language, in both Old and New Testaments, as an abomination in the sight of God.

Now homosexuals are pushing the passage of a law which will force Christian landlords to rent to them, in clear violation of their religious beliefs.

It goes against a devout Christian's religion to endorse homosexuality, yet the House is voting this week on a bill that, if passed, would force Christians to defy God by condoning the practice of homosexuality on their own private property.

Our religious freedom, guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, is currently being trampled. If we Christians do not stand up and speak out for the freedom to obey God's word as recorded in the Bible, if we do not fight now for our constitutionally guaranteed religious freedom, it will be taken away from us, piece by piece, until we are forced to bow down and worship the homosexuals' idol instead of the Creator of the universe.

Write, call, fax, or e-mail your elected representatives today. Tomorrow will be too late.

What are candidates' positions on transit?

I would like to pose a question to the mayoral candidates: What is your position on the future of transit in Honolulu?

Will you be continuing on the successful transit planning initiatives that our current mayor, Jeremy Harris, the City Council and the community vision teams produced? Or will you tear down all that work and try to build your own personal vision of transit?

The residents of Honolulu have worked hard in producing a transit system that is one of the best in the nation. This has in turn led to providing economic benefits throughout the community.

Moving forward with the plans that have been produced through the cooperative efforts of the residents (vision teams), City Council and mayor will insure that Honolulu can continue to move forward with solutions to transit challenges.

I, as a concerned citizen and voter, would like to know where mayoral candidates Duke Bainum and Mufi Hannemann stand on this important social and economic issue.

Use of incentive could solve education woes

I am disappointed that nobody is discussing the role (or lack) of incentive compensation in solving our education problems. In almost every successful venture, there is some sort of incentive compensation.

In the '80s Xerox Corp. implemented incentive pay from the janitor to the CEO. It brought the company back from the brink of death to become the first U.S. company to ever win back market share from the then-invincible Japanese competition.

More close-to-home examples include how Bank of Hawai'i took a salaried mortgage banking division to commission and went from nada to $2 billion in two years.

Some teachers, administrators and unions may be afraid of this because it exposes the mediocre performers.

We need to set measurable, achievable goals for every person and function involved in education.

We need to tie those goals to compensation and reward those who perform.

Every class, every school, every district has different problems that require different solutions that may not fit into the "standard operating procedure" manual. But when motivated to do so, people will find ways to achieve goals thinking outside of the box.

Along those lines, maybe we should start thinking about offering incentive tax credits to parents if the children perform.

Florida residents get full or partial tuition waivers to college if the student graduates with a certain GPA. How's that for out of the box?

Pauahi Rec Center dining is available

The Lanakila Meals on Wheels program offers seniors over the age of 60 the opportunity to have a nutritious, balanced meal, Monday through Friday, at no cost. We serve over 750 meals a day at 35 dining sites on O'ahu.

The Honolulu Advertiser recently reported two instances where seniors' access to the dining area at the Pauahi Recreation Center was limited. We immediately addressed these situations when they were brought to our attention and rectified them.

The program welcomes all eligible seniors; however, we do have procedures to follow to remain accountable.

Lanakila has an agreement with the Department of Parks and Recreation to use the Pauahi Recreation Center from 10:45 a.m. to noon to deliver our meal services to seniors.

All seniors are welcome at our group dining. We will continue to operate this valuable and much-needed program with an inclusive, open-door policy as we have for the past 33 years.

Frighten criminals

Police Chief Lee Donohue's commentary (Feb. 24) stated, "It is not necessary for private citizens to carry guns, except in instances where there is urgent reason for a person to fear severe injury. The potential danger and harm associated with widespread CCW licenses would far outweigh any benefits."

I find his statement disingenuous. The two bills Chief Donohue wrote against are in the state Legislature. SB 2398 and HB 2309 have been referred to their respective judiciary committees. Both would "require" that the police chief issue concealed licenses (CCW) to qualified private citizens who have cleared all background checks.

Currently, under state law (134-9), permits are issued at the "discretion" of the police chief. Over the past 10 years zero have been issued.

In the past decade I am sure a handful of people had an "urgent reason to fear severe injury." However, under current "discretionary laws, " acquiring a license is all but impossible.

We have read or heard reports where victims of violence (domestic, workplace, home break-in, etc.) suffered severe injuries or death. If concealed carry were a true option, many of these tragic incidences may have ended differently.

Nevada and Florida, along with 35 other states, have legalized the right to carry. Yet we go to Las Vegas and Disney World with no apprehension or fear. Officials from these states say they have not had any problems with citizens arming themselves or any upsurge in crime.

A recent episode of "20/20" interviewed inmates who said what they feared most was not prison or police, but a private citizen who is armed.

Recently, with no public hearing, Sen. Colleen Hanabusa, chairwoman of the Senate Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee, declined to hear the bill, essentially killing SB 2398 in 2004.

Hopefully, Sen. Sam Slom will reintroduce this bill next year.

Put school boards issue on the ballot

Hawai'i voters should be given the opportunity to decide the local-school-boards issue through a ballot question in November.

We should also have a say in whether the state Board of Education should be replaced with a standards and accountability commission.

After all, these important issues directly affect our schools, our money and our children. It should be our decision.

Give us the chance to exercise our right to vote. Put the questions on the ballot.

Reform should begin with opening libraries

If Gov. Lingle is serious about improving the sorry state of Hawai'i's schools, then she should start by re-opening the public libraries that are randomly closed on school days.

As a taxpayer whose days off have been Sunday and Monday for the last 15 years, I have personally been unable to use the Hilo Public Library since this Band-Aid budget fix went into effect. But it's the throng of students that I often saw there who are hurt the most.

On Mondays, they no longer have a quiet place to study or do their homework. The students are locked out of the library's extensive research materials they so desperately need for school projects and papers.

Part of the blame for Hawai'i's poor schools rests with our governor.

Don't despair over bill's rejection

I hope the thousands of supporters, many of whom worked tirelessly calling their representatives to voice support while urging their friends to do the same, will not view the re-committal of the death-with-dignity bill as a defeat.

We should be very proud of what we accomplished this year and the progress that has been made. We can take credit for many of the promises that were made by organizations such as the Hawai'i Medical Association, which proclaimed its commitment to working with its members to provide better pain management and educating its physicians about improved end-of-life care.

And I was encouraged that Hospice Hawai'i has both improved its already outstanding program and is working toward providing even better palliative care. As the Oregon Death With Dignity Act has shown, when quality hospice care is available, many of those initially considering a hastened death are satisfied with hospice as an alternative and go on to experience a "natural" death.

While I have always been the first to admit that improvements in pain management and better palliative care will reduce the desire for a hastened death, such alternatives will never entirely eliminate its need for those who are suffering intolerably and have exhausted every other reasonable option.

This year, as in the past, several of the testifiers offered exaggerated and fabricated stories as the "truth," but fortunately they were the exception rather than the rule. Most of those on both sides of the issue had honest and sincere differences of opinion.

For the first time many opponents admitted it was not assisted dying that they objected to, but rather their own fears about where such legislation could lead. Some had fallen easy prey to negative television and radio advertisements implying that if we allow dying people this dignified and humane option it would ultimately lead to the systematic elimination of our disabled, frail and elderly.

Yet the Sixth Annual Oregon Report, just released, again shows the law in that state is working well. As in the past, the majority of those exercising their legal option were elderly and suffering from cancer. As has been the case every year, loss of autonomy was cited as the primary reason for seeking a hastened death, with pain being one of the least significant concerns.

Despite what I view as progress, there were still victims — Hawai'i's dying who were counting on passage of this bill to offer them an option. Many admit they don't know if they would actually use it, but would still be comforted in knowing it was there. For them "maybe next year" is a hollow sentiment.

"Death with dignity" is not going to go away. Each year support among the public and healthcare community increases, and each year the gap between supporters and opponents narrows.

Who knows, next year may be our year.