Come on down! Our attractions are … closed

To the editor:

I have to wonder how sincere the effort truly is to get people to visit downtown.

Two recent examples:

First, I was excited to go to the new Neon Museum. On Saturday, Oct. 27, my husband and I thought it would be great to go there after dinner at Hugo's Cellar and walk around. However, the museum closes before sundown, and you need reservations. You can't just go look around - you have to go with a tour, and you must make reservations in advance.

So, visitors to downtown can't make a spontaneous decision to check out the new museum even if they want to (and had an extra $18 per person to blow.) It's strange they don't have evening hours.

Second, after reading Jane Ann Morrison's Oct. 27 column about photographer Lamar Marchese, we wanted to check out the Southern Nevada Museum of Fine Art. That would be nice to see after our dinner, since the aforementioned Neon Museum was going to be closed. The recorded message advised their regular hours are Wednesday to Saturday from noon to 5 p.m.

So again, anybody downtown for dinner or other reasons can't visit a nice museum located in the struggling Neonopolis.

If downtown businesses want people to come down for the evening and enjoy some entertainment, why are they closing up shop and limiting hours? Do they really want visitors, or not?

CHRIS MAZZA

LAS VEGAS

Making stuff up

To the editor:

I was disgusted by Glenn Cook's commentary in Sunday's Review-Journal regarding noncitizens registered to vote. In his column, Mr. Cook quotes two "noncitizens" who claim they were signed up to vote by representatives of Culinary Union Local 226, and further, that they were being pressured to vote. These "noncitizens" supposedly spoke to Mr. Cook under the condition that he would provide no identifying information. How convenient.

The Culinary union has no way of rebutting the claim because Mr. Cook is a member of the press and can get away with making unsubstantiated accusations without fear of penalty or recrimination.

I am not, and have never been, a member of any union. In fact, I don't particularly care for the Culinary Local 226 and some of its tactics. But how can the Review-Journal permit one of its own staff to make unsubstantiated accusations like these?

What if someone with press credentials wrote an article claiming they were told by two people that Mr. Cook molested 12 children, but they promised not to reveal their sources? Would the Review-Journal print that? Probably not.

I believe the Review-Journal should print a disclaimer, indicating that the unsubstantiated accusations made by a member of the editorial staff were strictly the declarations of the individual and that the Review-Journal is not accusing the Culinary Local 226 of committing multiple felonies.

But my guess is that such a statement is not likely to be forthcoming. Mr. Cook will be allowed to get away with it.

DAVID ADAMS

LAS VEGAS

Non-citizen voters

To the editor:

I read with concern Glenn Cook's Sunday column, "How many noncitizens are registered to vote?" which addressed illegal voter registration and union involvement. This should be of concern to all citizens of the state of Nevada and the United States. Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller was quoted on Saturday defending the integrity of the current system.

Should we be concerned because of Mr. Cook's findings, or feel comfortable with the secretary of state's position?

I know where I stand.

JAMES F. CAMBURN

LAS VEGAS

Charity is voluntary

To the editor:

In Steve Sebelius' Sunday column, "Thus saith the Lord," he affirms that "The God of the Bible cannot be shoehorned into either political party." He indicates that caring for the poor is a more prevalent biblical teaching than some of the social issues espoused by the Republican Party. He gives several scriptural examples of how it is difficult for the rich to enter heaven and of the important obligation to help and serve the poor.

I agree. However, there is a big difference in freely giving to the poor out of love - which is one of the highest, noblest, Christ-like character values to emulate - and taking from the rich like a band of thieves, or encouraging class warfare by amassing a majority and using the means of government to take possession of another's wealth or property simply because they have more.

The principles of charity and principles of socialism may target a similar goal - to end poverty - but one is of God and the other is not. One allows freedom, individual accountability and a love of mankind to flourish where both the giver and the receiver feel blessed and uplifted. The other feeds anger instead of love.

When we endeavored to force equality through criminal activity or powers of government, both parties are resentful. With government intrusion, those who have funds taken away may feel they are being punished for their success and that they are not appreciated, while those who receive may feel they're entitled to more.

Charity and caring for the poor should always be encouraged, but the idea of taking from the rich was never encouraged by biblical teachings. "Thou shalt not covet," one of the Ten Commandments, and likewise "Thou shalt not steal," clearly teach that we should not be envious or feel entitled to take from others.

A notion of the Democratic Party that it is noble to care for the poor by taking from others may be an old philosophy, but it is not Christian.

DON DAVIS

LAS VEGAS