Standing with St. James on homosexuality issue...

Standing with St. James

on homosexuality issue

Regarding Joseph Bell’s column, “Filmmaker focuses on Bible

interpretation,” I do not believe St. James Episcopal has an

“antipathy to homosexuals.”

As a Christian, I have had several homosexual friends and friends

who used to be homosexual. I believe any well-taught Christian will

know that God loves homosexuals more than their mother does.

To us he has said, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 5:43)

and “Judge not lest ye be judged” (Matthew 7:1). However, a good god

and father requires obedience of his children for their own health

and safety.

As to whether the practice of homosexuality is a sin, please read

Genesis chapters 18 and 19 and Romans, chapter 1. God needs only say,

“Thou shalt not commit murder” once to establish that murder is sin.

Taking God’s name in vain, lying, coveting, adultery, fornication,

anger, lust, hatred, unforgiveness and the practice of harboring any

evil (i.e., disobedience to God) are all sin. We each sin every day

and are obliged to love and not judge one another.

Those in positions of authority in the church are all sinners by

definition. We all struggle with our weaknesses. But to ordain as a

church leader one who openly embraces, practices and advocates sin is

definitely not in keeping with the clear words and intent of the

Scriptures nor the traditions of the church fathers as they have been

handed down to us. I stand with my brethren at St. James.

WAYNE LEFFLER

Costa Mesa

Picketing part of the

problem, not the solution

I just think it’s a shame that people were picketing out in front

of the Orange County Humane Society shelter, because there have been

so many good things that have happened there.

It’s a no-kill shelter, the only one I know of that’s a no-kill

shelter in Orange County, and what’s going to happen to all of those

animals if they somehow succeed in shutting down the shelter? Most

animals will be dead because no one will claim them fast enough. I

adopted a cat from there because I thought they were doing such a

good job. The dogs got walks every day; they were played with; they

ran. I never saw that at any other shelter. They had clean food and

water. I never saw any maggots or any of that.

If they’re so concerned, in my opinion, about not having

up-to-date housing for these dogs or whatever it is that they’re

complaining so adamantly about, instead of picketing, they could be

fundraising. It doesn’t make much sense to be more of a problem. I

mean, make a solution instead of being another problem. It irritates

me that people would have no other use of their time than protesting

in front of a no-kill shelter. That seems like a waste of time on

everybody’s part.

KATIE ROTHMAN

La Habra

Stop barking at each

other and start listening

Regarding the Pilot question on Oct. 7 of whether there are other

ways than a lawsuit to resolve differences between the Orange County

Humane Society shelter owner and some of the shelter’s former

volunteers, yes, there are other ways. What happened is a perfect

instance of how often people do not know how to resolve

disagreements.

Resolving issues is a learned skill. That’s what professional

conflict resolution people do. This is what some young people in our

schools have been taught. They become, “peer resolution specialists.”

I would think the first step is for all parties to decide to agree

to talk it out. Everyone should be willing to take turns listening

without interruption to the others, perhaps in three-minute segments.

Then, each has their turn to speak, only about how they feel, and how

the issue affects them, with no name-calling or insinuations. Do this

a few times so everyone has all the information from all the parties,

how it affects them personally and how they personally feel about it.

State areas of agreement. Isolate and clarify the exact problem

still existing. Look at what each of you can do to solve the

situation. Brainstorm other ways of handling it, perhaps bringing in

people with new ideas to solve it. Lighten up! Work together.

ZOE’ MCCOLLUM

Newport Beach

In-house city attorney

not chopped liver

I find myself in agreement with Doug Sutton’s letter in the Oct. 2

issue of the Daily Pilot, “OK to hire outside firms shows lack of

leadership,” in taking the position that hiring an outside legal firm

in place of a full-time city attorney is not financially prudent.

As most cities soon find out when they consider using a private

law firm instead of having city attorney in-house legal services,

city legal services costs will mushroom by transferring to private

services. First of all, it will inevitably become apparent that the

private municipal law firm will use the “billable hours” method of

charging for even the most modest type of legal services. I venture

to say that it would be difficult to find any city of Costa Mesa’s

size and complexity to switch from an in-house city attorney system

to a private legal firm. The reason is, like Sutton said, it’s not

financially prudent.

Until I retired and moved to Newport Beach in September 1977, I

had served 20 years as the full-time city attorney and prosecutor for

Culver City and Inglewood. From that experience, I came to know

first-hand that a city attorney does much more than give advice to

council and staff and represent the city in legal actions. A

full-time city attorney advises the city manager and staff on an

ongoing daily and hourly basis. A staff city attorney is just as much

a member of the city administrative team and can be regarded just as

important and vital as any department head.

Bob Burnham, who recently retired, was the full-time city attorney

of Newport Beach for many years. He performed such intrinsically

valuable services to council members, staff and helpfulness to

residents that I’m sure even the suggestion that a private law firm

replace the likes of Burnham would be greeted with nothing but

raucous laughter in Newport Beach.

DONALD OLSON

Newport Beach