Letters: Actions speak much louder than words
I welcome the eloquent commentary by Andy Harris ("Tax reform bill should be a moral document," My View, Dec. 26). I've been frustrated by a disparity between words of avowed Christians (GOP members and "evangelicals" in particular) versus their actions. Hypocrisy is: "… the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; feigning to be what one is not."
I don't expect every Christian to agree on tax/fiscal policy. However, there is a document, agreed upon by me and thee that condemns the hypocrisy of these current Pharisees: the Bible.
For example, verses following those quoted by Harris are: "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' He will reply, "Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."
The operative phrase is "the least of these." When your shopping experience is unpleasant because people live on the streets, ask, "Why?"
Why I'm voting for Measure 101
Measure 101 to protect health care benefits is not only important to me as an elder person, but also because I care about the 400,000 kids, countless seniors, disabled Oregonians and other low-income people whose health will be protected if we, the voters, pass Measure 101.
I receive Medicaid benefits for chronic medical conditions, and I rely on voters to make my coverage continue.
Measure 101 is supported by hundreds of organizations I trust, including the AARP, Oregon Nurses Association, Providence Health and more.
Please vote yes with me this January on Measure 101 so that all in Oregon have access to affordable health care. There will be out-of-state lobbyists and TV ads fighting against Measure 101, so it's especially important that everyone mail in their ballot with a yes vote.
Questions about museum's plan
In Mayor Ted Wheeler's Dec. 13 comments, he implied testifiers at the Portland Art Museum hearing a week earlier who took time to oppose the ordinance change should have had better things to do. He suggested condescendingly that with the ruling complete, we all should go volunteer.
Wheeler has no idea what and how we each contribute to this city and our individual communities. His words were dismissive and gratuitously judged testifiers' opinions as without merit.
With the ordinance change approved, we hope the council has asked for a legal clause requiring the museum to keep its lobby open as a walkway "in perpetuity."
If this doesn't happen, then constituents know this is a temporary agreement and an unconditional giveaway. Commissioner Amanda Fritz alone noted the benefits of the ordinance change to the museum were clear, but benefits to the public were not.
During the Dec. 7 testimony, the council chastised opponents of the change as being unnecessarily skeptical of the museum. Trust is earned, as is mistrust.
The museum already had drawn up concept plans for an encumbered property. When asked by the community for a Plan B keeping the walkway open, they refused and would not consider returning to their Chicago architects for a revised concept to keep the eight-foot walkway open. Instead they hired a lobbyist to promote the ordinance change. I believe "entitlement" best describes this approach.
How can we believe that the museum will keep its lobby open as a public passageway after several inevitable and "inconvenient" incidents occur? And how will the City Council respond to the museum changing the open hours at that point without a written agreement?