BLAME THE BRITISH
I got to thinking about Findlay flooding as I sat on my basement stairs and watched the lake in my backyard drain through my rock foundation into my floor drain. Whose fault is this, after all?
We weren’t supposed to flood, some other place should have gotten it. So, mentally, I decided to go on the “Flood Witch Hunt Caper.”
The first thing that popped into my mind was Col. James Findlay, who built his fort downtown, near the Ace Hardware in the War of 1812. That’s it, old gout-ridden Findlay planted his darned fort at the easiest ford of the “Mini Muddy.”
Subsequently, the city of Findlay sprung up from that fort! Pin flooding on the old goat or maybe even his son, who was reportedly a sober kid but not so smart, meeting with some shady British solicitors, his daddy’s detractors said.
But wasn’t Findlay ordered to build the fort by Gen. Hull? Hull was known to his friends as “Flynn.” I’ll bet “Flynn” was in cahoots with some foreign power like France or Britain or somebody. He just looks shifty in those old prints of him. Bet a buck he was friends with Aaron Burr.
But wait, the need for the fort was a result of the war. So, who caused the war? Was it Findlay’s kid? Was it Flynn who clandestinely met with British interests?
That’s it. It was the British! Now there is a rotten foreign power for ya, run at that time by a sneaky, eyes-too-close-together, German king! They impressed seamen from American merchant vessels to serve in the British navy, causing the war.
That’s it, flooding is caused by the Brits! No foreign power should ever involve itself in our flooding.
My plan would be simple. In addition to cleaning the river, cutting benches, etc., building another reservoir, in effect a wall, on purchased land, pumping water into it in flood times, and releasing the water slowly later and making the British pay for it!
A FETUS IS NOT A BEAR
It seems that Jim Stahl (letter, July 15) forgot what he wrote in his original letter (July 10).
He wrote: “So the question is begged: if a bear might be protected on religious grounds, why not a human baby?”
The point of my letter (July 12) was to say that this is a complicated question, because a fetus is not a bear.
There is also the problem of bringing religion into questions of bodily autonomy.
One of the questions is: Which religion does the government choose to recognize in its actions?
How would you feel if the city of Findlay put up a sacrificial altar in Dorney Plaza because a group of residents wanted the freedom to slaughter goats because the group’s religious beliefs demanded it?
A woman having an abortion doesn’t prevent anyone from practicing their religion. Your religious freedom is limited by the civil rights of other people. It has been that way since the first day of the United States.
If you don’t want your tax money used to pay for abortions, then you will have to accept people not wanting to pay for the military, or not paying for roads, or not paying for your church’s tax exemption.
A REMINDER OF THE DANGERS
Thank you for printing the article “A Blue Wall of Grief” (Viewpoint, July 8). The death of officer Miosotis Familia in New York is a reminder of the dangers law enforcement officers face across the country.
The column sought to make people aware of this fact, which is too easily forgotten. The article also quoted the author Heather Mac Donald but did not mention her most recent book. I recommend the book she wrote titled “The War on Cops,” which provides valuable insight into the challenges our law enforcement personnel are facing across the country, particularly in urban areas. I also recommend attending the Citizens’ Sheriff’s Academy class put on twice a year.
This class provides insights into all the ways our first responders at the sheriff’s office are protecting and serving our community.
The blue wall grieves but continues to protect and serve their communities. As citizens, we should continue to support all law enforcement personnel and their families.
The death of officer Familia reminds our country that the freedoms we enjoy are made possible by those willing to serve and put their lives on the line so that we can live in peace.
Driving on Main Street Sunday morning, we were terribly disappointed and sad to see many of our lovely trees along the walk had been cut down. Just two weeks ago, my friends and I commented on how much they added to the look of Main Street.
Why would anyone cut down living, healthy trees? Could they not have been incorporated into our new beautification plans, whatever they are?
Trees can hide shabby buildings, shade the cement walk for pedestrians and, least of all, soak up underground water, which is sorely needed in our town, as we saw this past week.
What are the city planners thinking?