Flying Public Doesn't Know About Flying
Congratulations on your cover story "Pie in the Sky" (issue of April 27-May 3). I was alerted to it by a Comair pilot who has kept me apprised of the shenanigans of 1999's "Best Managed Regional Airline."
The ultimate consideration in all of this is the question of social justice and the rights of the working person vis-a-vis his/her employer. The struggle against social Darwinists continues. Thanks to the courts, corporate America has greater "protection" than the individual citizen.
How grandly ironic that Comair would "seek relief" from the court with its injunction against the pilots! Shades of American Airlines pilots being enjoined because they "inconvenienced" the flying public -- such audacious behavior!
The flying public, which has absolutely no idea of what aviation and flying actually is and involves, views the industry simply in terms of "convenience" and little else. Of course, that such a perception exists is due in large part to the advertising spent in its promotion.
Rather than look to Aviation Week & Space Technology -- a journal devoted to "upping" the industry, both civil and defense -- the flying public might better focus on the "on-call window" for Jack, the pilot profiled in your story, and note his remark, "If I'm scheduled to fly eight hours, that could mean a 14- to 16-hour day for me, all starting after I've been up already for at least 11 hours."
As a retired academic, I am nonetheless bemused at Prof. David Walsh and what you attribute to him: "When carriers operated the smaller aircrafts, they could pay the pilots less and work the pilots longer because they didn't have enough experience to fly for a major airline." Pardon me, but that's one hell of a piece of logic! It's also something paralleled by Kit Darby, whom you cite as saying, "Pilots need to separate emotion from their profession. ... Pilots should know the issues, participate, vote and go play golf." The quote of the year has to be Darby's regarding the golden parachutes for Comair executives: "Sure it upsets pilots, but this person is not protected by the union. The pilots all benefit from these guys." What is it that teen-agers utter, mouths agape? "Duh!"
Darby and Walsh, are they certified aviators? Do they know what "reduced rest" is and that it's "legal" in terms of FAA jargon?
The balance of your story is most commendable. Let us hope that it produces a resolution which will be consistent not only with the aspirations of the pilots, attendants and other employees but also respects the interests of Comair's shareholders.
-- Joseph, Flyingmars@aol.com
More on Censorship
Thank you very much for including the Immaculate Misconceptions censorship issue in the recent Arts Beat column ("Forgetting Mapplethorpe," issue of April 20-26). I would like to make one correction in that the exhibition was never actually mounted at NKU.
Ellen Zahorec withdrew the the show in the spring of 1996 before it was to open that October due to many pressures by many individuals. In place of Immaculate Misconceptions, we mounted nothing. The galleries were completely dark the month of October, with exception of one couch in the middle of the gallery with a single light on it. We titled the event "a month without art." It made many people realize here at NKU and in the community how important art can be to our daily lives.
Mapplethorpe and censorship are still worth discussing. Thank you for remembering Mapplethorpe.
-- David J. Knight, Director of Collections and Exhibitions Northern Kentucky University
Don't Nitpick
With regard to the letter entitled "Blankenship Not Infallible" (issue of April 6-12), Al Zellhuber's protest to Michael Blankenship's attack on the Catholic Church was prettily worded and dense with textual support from the Power of One column ("In the Name of the Father," issue of March 16-22). However, beneath it all, his argument was well-founded enough to resemble the defensive tirade of a 6-year-old boy after a verbal beration of his mother by his peers at the playground.
Zellhuber asks where these people are who were affected by the sins of the Catholic Church. Open your eyes! They're everywhere! Take, for example, my 12th grade English teacher, who lost family members to the Holocaust, during which the Catholic Church declared noninvolement. This is to say nothing of the Catholic Church's continued aid in perpetuating the puritanical mentality in the Western world which breeds intolerance and judgment rather than the unconditional love preached by the big man himself, Jesus Christ. Along the same lines, with regard to another comment made by Zellhuber, whether the Pope himself dehumanizes gays and lesbians or simply condemns them is beside the point. This condemnation again serves to breed intolerance for this growing group of people, which in turn does in fact dehumanize them. For that matter, whether homosexuality is in actuality a perversion, as Zellhuber puts it, is also a matter of opinion.
This opinion, even, is rapidly changing. Zellhuber admits that "we have Catholics who follow birth control, others who believe in a woman's right to choose, others who believe priests can/should marry, etc." I personally also know Catholics who are actively homosexual. But regardless of this increasing alienation of the church from its followers, those who practice abortion, birth control, homosexuality, etc., are still sinners according to the official creed of the Catholic Church.
If the church intends to keep its vast following, it's time for the Vatican to start rethinking its value system and the consequences that accompany living by such an ultraconservative moral code in today's society. In spite of the leaps and bounds the Catholic Church has made in the past 35 years, there are still obvious flaws in the Catholic creed that have yet to be addressed. The church's stance on abortion and birth control is still accountable for the notorious size and poverty of Roman Catholic families in many countries that aren't capable of feeding such vast numbers of people. The church's condemnation of homosexuality inarguably breeds intolerance in our communities and our homes. The church's blatant disregard for the huge steps women have taken in the past 30 years provides Catholic women with yet another obstacle between themselves and true equality. The list goes on.
This system of ethics needs to be stripped down to its naked essence and rebuilt. What ever happened to the teachings of Jesus? What happened to the 10 Command-ments, for that matter? For an institution founded on brotherly love and forgiveness, the church has done a good job of condemning the majority of the world.
With regard to the Pope's sweeping apology for all the wrongdoings of the church, it was a wise and much-needed gesture. However, it was just that: a gesture. One heartfelt public statement cannot account for all the pain caused due to the church's mistakes.
In spite of all the changes being made, there is still substantial reason to doubt the validity of the Catholic Church, and only time will tell if the church's attempts at progress are genuine. On the other hand, we must still admire the supposedly infallible Pope for finally admitting to the all-too-obvious fallibility of the church. Although it creates an interesting paradox, let's not nitpick -- it's a big step.
-- Irene Richardson, Cincinnati
