Big difference between U.S. and terrorists
Re: “Gurdon’s grim view ignore U.S. Constitution, traditions,” From Readers, Nov. 14
Mr. Grey misunderstands Meghan Gurdon’s points: The U.S. as a matter of policy does not unilaterally inflict discomfort outside the rule of law, whereas the enemy as a matter of practice saws off the heads of captives and posts the video on the Internet.
Those who can’t see the difference have truly lost perspective and that, my friends, was the main point of Ms. Gurdon’s op-ed.
Indeed, those of us who were put through resistance training are genuinely perplexed by the outrage of the left over U.S. interrogation practices.
Kent D. Johnson,
Retired USAF fighter pilot
Rosslyn
Noise compliance voluntary in Fairfax County, too?
Re: “Fairfax planners to weigh green building measures,” Nov. 13
At 6 a.m. workers arrived at a construction site less than 24 feet from my bedroom window and started hammering — which disturbed my sleep. And it was not the first time.
While I understand that the Fairfax Board of Supervisors is not enforcing zoning ordinances, at the very least it should enforce the noise ordinance.
After a neighborhood meeting, the construction crew — which is building four houses where there used to be two and doubling the density in our zoned single-family neighborhood — quieted down.
However, in the past two weeks, they have gone back to their previous practice of arriving at the site before 7 a.m.
If construction crews don’t comply with the noise ordinance, the county should withdraw the privilege of building a new subdivision in an established residential neighborhood.
Catherine M. Voorhees
Alexandria
Both Fatah, Hamas vow to destroy Israel
Re: “Hamas rounds up Fatah activists after Gaza rally turns deadly,” Nov. 13
There is very little difference between the demands of Fatah under Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas. Both are dedicated to the destruction of Israel, just with different timetables.
Hamas makes it a near-term goal, while Fatah advocates the long-term approach: First through negotiations to weaken the Jewish state and then using terror to destroy it.
Negotiations, whether with Mr. Abbas or with Hamas, can only lead to non-reciprocated concessions from Israel.
Nelson Marans
Silver Spring
Church-state separation implicit in Constitution
Re: “Public sleeps while judges destroy Constitution,” From Readers, Nov. 13
The principle of church-state separation is not “explicitly” in the Constitution. However, it’s implicit, in that the Constitution does not grant government any authority to dabble in or provide financial support to religion.
The principle is more explicit in the First Amendment, which denies government the authority to pass any law “respecting an establishment of religion,” a provision made clear by the Supreme Court from 1878 on and made applicable to state and local government by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Mr. Marsh also decries the legal principle of “stare decisis” — the general practice of courts following precedents.
But if our courts paid no attention to precedent, each new case would be like the movie “Groundhog Day” and chaos would prevail.
Edd Doerr,
President,
Americans for Religious Liberty
Silver Spring
