Dr. Elders’ Confirmation

* Dr. Joycelyn Elders’ support of school-based health clinics is both farsighted and fiscally responsible. Students accessing clinic services receive the care they desperately need and return to their classrooms with minimum time away from their studies, enhancing their opportunities for educational advancement.

Those who oppose Elders’ appointment as surgeon general frequently argue that her support of school-based health clinic services increases the risk of teen sexuality and pregnancy. These assertions are not borne out by the facts.

First, the vast majority of visits to school-based clinics around the nation are for primary medical care--and the need continues to grow. At the three Los Angeles Unified School District school-based health clinics, fully 93% of registered patients have no other source of regular health care, because they are under- or completely uninsured.

Second, there is no evidence that the presence of school-based health clinics increases sexual activity among students. What we do know is that, despite our emphasis on abstinence, some students still become sexually active. Elders’ advocacy of appropriate contraceptive services recognizes that it is impossible to dictate sexual behavior. Her commitment to the prevention of teen pregnancy will be a powerful weapon in preventing abortion among our nation’s young women.

MARSHA CHARNEY, President

Student Health Service Support Fund

Los Angeles

* Your article on Elders’ health views (July 24) appeared to “glorify” her statement: “I have seen bright young people all over this country in an ocean surrounded by the sharks of alcohol, violence, homicide, suicide, AIDS and teen-age pregnancy--while we argue about values.”

I cannot agree to her advocacy that “the best place we’ve got are the schools.” They’ve got their own problems. Whatever happened to the home, and our parents’ value guidance? In my opinion all of the “sharks” she refers to are, as a matter of fact, the result of the decline of this country’s moral and political values.

To paraphrase a recent campaign slogan, “It is the values, stupid!”

JOHN HOLT

La Canada

* In response to “Elders Is an Insult to People of Faith,” Column Right, July 25:

As a professor of philosophy at Catholic University of America, Patrick Riley should know better than most that people of faith hold varying viewpoints on everything from dietary restrictions to abortion. He affronts the majority of people of faith by insinuating that Elders is a “pagan.” Surely he knows, as most anyone who has followed Elders’ career knows, she is a United Methodist. Yes, Mr. Riley, United Methodists are Christians too.

As a United Methodist, I can vouch for the frustration that is felt by people of faith who are not Catholic or fundamentalists (or even Christian), when we are continually subjected to laws and public policy which narrowly reflect the faith of a few to the detriment of the rest of us. I am referring to the arcane attitudes toward sex education, contraception and the restricting of reproductive rights.

BUNNIE RIEDEL

La Puente

* Riley’s column is a classic example of the flawed analysis of conservative Roman Catholic thinkers who decry criticism of their church.

In a society that separates church and state and that also permits free speech, purveyors of religious dogma cannot expect to enjoy some special exemption from criticism and even ridicule for their belief systems.

If the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church attempts to actually abolish a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion, those of us who want such freedoms to persist have every right to criticize both the church and its very philosophical underpinnings.

The Senate should confirm Elders.

EDWARD TABASH

Beverly Hills

* Every American should have listened to the C-Span hearings to understand the level of incompetence presidential appointments have reached. For Elders to hold the same office and be associated with C. Everett Koop should be an embarrassment to all Americans and a dishonor to Koop. Surgeon general? National health care chief? Official condom inspector? This person couldn’t even get a bedtime story right.

With the real health problems this country has, we need a real leader in that slot, not a master of confusion.

BOB FORSBERG

Lake Forest

Gays in Military

If President Clinton were serving in the military under his new anti-gay policy, he could be discharged for hugging Vice President Gore.

CHARLES McKAIN

San Diego

Space Exploration

* The column “We Need to Reach for the Stars” (Commentary, July 20) contained several startling paragraphs: “In the past, wars provided such a unifying structure. Today, we cannot afford war simply to provide unity. Other might propose more ‘politically correct’ projects as candidates for a unifying force, such as cleaning the environment, curing poverty or saving the whales . . . The problem with such proposals is that they are inevitably tainted with leftist politics, hidden agendas and dubious prospects for success.”

Here, James Glass reveals his prejudice in pushing for his “outer space” solution to our problems. Obviously, lots of conservatives and centrists also support saving this planet as the only one most of us can live on now and for centuries to come.

NANCY ZEIGER

Laguna Hills

* Glass offers nothing more than a tired old mantra from the ‘60s: The government can bring us everything, including moral and spiritual uplift. Glass is welcome to his nostalgia; he is free to look at NASA’s latest turkeys and to dream sci-fi fantasies about the conquest of space. But I think more of the big federal technology center that labors for 20 years and brings forth a new type of silver polish.

T.A. HEPPENHEIMER

Fountain Valley

Changing the National Anthem

* I agree with Ronald C. White (Commentary, July 22) that “America the Beautiful” would be preferable to “The Star Spangled Banner” as our national anthem. But there’s a better choice yet: Woody Guthrie’s rousing “This Land Is Your Land.”

Like “America the Beautiful,” “This Land Is Your Land” celebrates our country’s natural beauty, including “the redwood forests,” “the Gulf-stream waters, “ and “the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts.” But Woody’s song also honors the human industry that contributed to this country’s greatness, mentioning “the wheat fields waving” and the “ribbon of highway.” Most importantly, the song exalts the restless and often subversive human spirit that is the foundation of our liberty. There exists no more eloquent or concise statement of the enormous responsibilities and privileges of participatory democracy than the phrase, “this land is made for you and me.”

ROBERT FINN

Pasadena

* “American the Beautiful” is one of the most beautiful patriotic songs we sing. But it should not be the national anthem. “The Star Spangled Banner” represents the challenges it took to give our country the liberty and achievements we have attained. Is it time to cancel the memory of the men who fought and died for the very things we enjoy and cherish in “America the Beautiful”? Since the freedom we enjoy today is intrinsically founded on the sacrifices of those men, there is every reason to continue to honor them by a brush with the drama of what they endured.

BETTY STORCH

Newport Beach

* White was correct in asserting that “America The Beautiful” should be made our national anthem. I always chose this song as a lullaby for each of my children, because it was the only one whose simple and sweet melody I could approximate and whose lucid and moving lyrics I could mostly remember. It never failed to have a calming effect on both the baby and me.

The feelings of serenity and inclusiveness “America The Beautiful” can impart seem much needed by all of us today.

Because many of us would resist surrendering our attachment to the “Star Spangled Banner” as the traditional anthem, it is too much to expect that a change could be accomplished overnight. Perhaps if, just for awhile, we had two national anthems, either or both which might legitimately be played at governmental and other public activities, the transition would be eased. Eventually, one of these songs would become the popularly accepted standard, the other receding into the historic mists of beloved national icons.

WAYNE DICKMAN

San Bernardino

Bosnia

* The incredulous statements made by Alexander Yahontov, researcher for the Serbian-American Community Relations Coalition, were filled with slander and hate (letter, July 23). He forgets that it was the Serbs who opposed the Vance-Owen plan, not the Muslims or Croats. Regarding “staged” events, was it not the Serbs who staged ethnic cleansing, was it not the Serbs who committed aggression against Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, was it not the Serbs who constructed concentration camps, was it not the Serbs who systematically raped at least 50,000 Bosnian women, were not Milosevic and Karadzic implicated by former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger as war criminals?

Bosnia wants to preserve a multicultural society, evident by the Serbs, Croats and Muslims participating in the government. Is the state dominated by Eastern Orthodox Christians, Serbia, representing Christianity or is it exploiting religion to justify this genocide? The denial of this genocide is becoming more obscene as each day of appeasement passes and as the Bosnian victims are vilified.

SUBHA SULEJMANAGIC

Women’s Coalition Against Ethnic Cleansing, Los Angeles