Chick-fil-A cartoon inappropriate
I’m reading the August 9 Town & Village and I find your cartoon exceedingly obnoxious, insulting and unfair about Chick-fil-A.
Just because the owner of this place has a religious view that doesn’t support homosexuality, typically (gay) people have been all over the company. It is against the law to not hire anybody and god forbid he didn’t follow the law, he would really deserve criticism. Why is a Christian criticized for having Christian views? I have no religious views so for me this isn’t about my religion. My criticism is about freedom of speech.
If you’re going to criticize somebody, people in the Orthodox Jewish community would excommunicate or shun or expel any member of their community who is homosexual. Muslims murder homosexuals. Not only do they not have homosexual marriage in the Muslim world, they’re killed before they get a chance. But I don’t hear any of this nonsense.
People have a right in this country to say what they like. If you don’t agree, it is your right to disagree with it with facts and figures, not your own personal hatred and stupidity.
Joseph Moskowitz, ST
I found the Chick-fil-A cartoon included in your August 9th issue to be out of place in T&V, a neighborhood newspaper that doesn’t typically take a stand on broader social and political issues.
If the editors do want to take a stand on an issue, fine, but then take the time and professionalism to write an op-ed piece explaining your view and why you take the stand that you do.
Your inclusion of the cartoon was a cheap shot and shows a disregard for the beliefs and opinions of others with whom you may not agree.
Mr. Cathy had and has every right to express his belief regarding same-sex marriage. His chain of restaurants does not condemn or deny service to anyone and he has made that clear in his statements.
Amy De Rosa, PCV
Editor’s note: In our view, it isn’t unfair and is in fact pretty traditional for newspapers, including community newspapers, to run cartoons on a variety of political and social issues.
Dog policy is not warm and fuzzy for all
Re: T&V’s Dog Days of Summer issue, Aug. 9
I read your dogs issue and wanted to address some quality of life issues in the complex. While having dogs in Stuyvesant Town is a new experience for everyone, it is not all good.
It is not the pets, but the owners who make it very unpleasant for their neighbors. For example, on my floor we now have four dogs (two in one apartment). When I get off the elevator, it sounds like a kennel and smells like a latrine. All the dogs yap in unison, one pet owner lets her dog go in the apartment, another apartment houses two dogs that bark and hurl themselves at the front door, which sounds like someone is banging to get out. It is not fair to the tenants or the animals.
And I could go on and on about the trails of urine and excrement often seen throughout the complex, as well as dogs relieving themselves in the newly planted greens, and the early morning barking outside my window. I do not think dogs belong in the complex, and wish there was some way to control the influx of dogs and limit the number of dogs per floor.
I hope your readers (and Soapbox writer) understand that allowing dogs in the complex is not the same warm and fuzzy experience for everybody, but we need to find a fair solution to accommodate everyone.
Barbara Bienenfeld, ST
Thoroughly pussed off
During the past decade or so, T&V has published many letters that contain disparaging comments about the many pigeons, squirrels and recently dogs that share ST/PCV with us.
Being an animal lover, this to me is an insult to these beloved beings! Far worse, however, is the lack of any coverage concerning God’s most mysterious and beautiful creatures: cats! I have learned over time to pay appropriate attention and never diss pussycats or kittens.
David Chowes, PCV