Flawed Arguments

To the Editor:

In response to JoAnne Barnhart supporting the rejection of the Buddhist temple: the arguments presented in the letter are certainly valid concerns, but they are flawed.

Perhaps the location of the temple is not ideal; Boggs Hill is a residential area with windy roads. The fact is that there are many places of worship not found on main roads like Route 6: the Adath Israel on Huntingtown Road, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on Saw Mill Road, and Newtown Congregational Church on West Street to name a few. If these back roads are suitable for places of worship, Boggs Hill should be as well. As suggested, installing a few streetlights and modifying police routes would make Boggs Hill safer to travel.

The letter also mentions the figure of some 450 cars. It seems the number of cars and people were confused; 450 people are expected with 150 cars.

Perhaps there are more suitable locations in another part of town for the temple. But the reasons for rejecting the Boggs Hill site are insubstantial. In the past, it seems that others have had similar concerns about road safety when a place of worship has been proposed on a back road. There are simple solutions to these concerns, hence the places of worship listed above.

On a side note, debating is more constructive when the people involved are removed from the arguments. So referring to the monks as “spiteful and inconsiderate” really does nothing to enhance the argument. Facts are much more useful in proving a point.

Amanda Bloom

30 Ridge Road, Newtown                                       December 10, 2005