Logical and prudent
Reference "A prudent change for the Boy Scouts" (Our Views, Feb. 5): Prudent, really? "Prudent" is an inappropriate term to use for a recommendation that is so weakly developed.
I will cut to the chase: The Boy Scouts of America oath is: "On my honor, I will do my best, to do my duty to God and my country. To help other people at all times, to obey the Scout Law, and to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight."
As a private organization with a lengthy history, this oath is not based on "... traditional values," "... old-fashioned values" or "... the religious tenets of affiliates." Nor does it describe a private organization that "... judges others on what they do, not who they are."
The oath clearly expresses the core values of international scouting and BSA. The oath reflects their organizational "moral compass" — that is both logical and prudent.
James T. Bryson
Look at 'investments'
Regarding "No reason to fear" (Your Views, Feb. 1): Contrary to writer F.M. Younglove, weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. A WMD is any nuclear, chemical or biological weapon. Chemical weapons were found in Iraq, and if you doubt it ask the bomb disposal personnel who needed nerve agent antidote after being exposed to such a weapon.
As far as the military industrial complex is concerned, I suggest your readers compare the results of defense spending versus that of other federal programs, such as the war on poverty. The money "invested" in these programs has failed to achieve any of their goals, and at a tremendous cost. When one wants to stop wasteful spending I suggest they look into the return on those "investments" as well.
Stephen C. Zakrzewski
Regarding "To reduce gun ownership, tax weapons like property" (Feb. 4): Lewis Diuguid's suggestion to tax guns, ammo and magazines like cigarettes, alcohol and gasoline is as misguided as most liberal, bigger-government control freak ideas of the "Big Brother Utopia." First, such taxing would require registration — violative of the Second Amendment. Second, while Diuguid seems perfectly content with his bolt-action .22 rifle, that is hardly a gun capable of defending oneself, one's family or one's country (militia) with.
I suppose, following Diuguid's rationale, we should attack the nation's obesity epidemic by outrageously taxing all fast food and groceries by their calorie count? Make it too expensive to eat, and Americans will self-correct and lose weight and be healthier?
I assume the Tribune only published Diuguid's tripe to show what moronic ideas the left typically comes up with and how little thought and intelligence is behind any of them.