Leave science to scientists
In the current session of the Idaho Legislature, several bills flexing some legislators’ power and control to promote divisiveness, ignorance, false science, undermining our public school system and their “Christian” agenda have been introduced.
The most current is House Bill 493, which prohibits any state entities from requiring persons to wear a “face covering” for the purpose of “slowing the spread of a contagion or infectious disease”. The Idaho Constitution defines “defending life” and “securing safety” as inalienable rights of its citizens, and the government of the people is instituted to enact laws for their “protection and benefit.” The fact that contagions (germs) cause diseases, some deadly, was established in the 19th century. As the result of legitimate scientific research, medical practitioners have practiced wearing masks to protect patients from the spread of respiratory germs for more than a century. Enacting mandates to implement scientifically proven methods to slow the spread of a respiratory virus that has resulted in a worldwide pandemic definitely falls in the category of “protection.” Further, no one has a right to expose me to a germ that is killing more than 3,000 people a day in the U.S., nor do I have the right to expose another person.
I implore our legislators to leave science to the scientists, parents to control what books their children read, and teachers to define what education is. Work on your constitutionally mandated tasks of fully funding public education and protecting our abused and neglected children who are already born.
Sharon Curtis
Moscow
Ramifications of bill
As a resident of a border town between Washington and Idaho, we face a unique set of circumstances with conflicting laws in the two states.
A prominent one that I just saw in the Tribune is an Idaho bill to criminalize ads about marijuana. I can understand why people might be upset about an ad that offers delivery of pot to an Idaho address and billboards advertising pot in Idaho. However, to ban “any person who willfully publishes any notice or advertisement in any medium of a product or service that is illegal under Idaho law” is unfair for people and businesses in border communities.
For example, does this mean that pot stores in Washington cannot advertise in the Lewiston Tribune, Spokesman-Review and other newspapers that have cross-border readership? Will the newspapers and their publishers be liable under this law?
Do note that the law as it reads says “in any medium,” which I take to include newspapers. If the law as written is passed, not only will the newspapers lose advertising revenue, but Washington readers will lose out on seeing the ads and specials from the pot stores.
I urge the sponsors of the bill to consider the full ramifications of their bill.
Charlotte Omoto
Palouse
