TATTOOS: They're not all bad

Timber Lockhart’s My Turn column was welcomed and answered my question of whether the younger generation ever read newspaper editorials. Hers was well thought out, not vindictive, and presented her case very well. Thank you, Timber. Some of the older generation would do well to follow the pattern of your response to Royal Jenson’s letter to the editor.

I agree with Timber partially All tattoos are not repulsive. Case in point is a mother who lost her daughter in an accident and had a beautiful small butterfly tattooed on her arm to remind her of her daughter. That shows loving affection. Excess, however, is not beautiful or tasteful.

This question is directed toward all parents: Wouldn’t some of the money be better spent providing food and medication for those in need? Think how much good could have resulted if just a portion of the money spent on tattoos in the past decade had been diverted to impoverished people in underdeveloped countries. I encourage readers to think about donating money to Care, World Emergency Relief, Salvation Army and other relief organizations. There are some people in this world trying to survive on $4 to $6 a month.

The younger generation seems to be doing a good job of coming to the aid of their friends and neighbors. If parents would give their teenagers a photo of a near skeletal child and tell them that their allowance could be spent on saving the life of a similar child or having a tattoo, many of these young people would choose to aid the children.

Nose rings remind me of the practice of dairymen putting rings in the nose of their bulls so they can be led around. My wife and I had a very unpleasant experience in a restaurant when a young man with a nose ring, and an obvious sinus problem, sat down in the booth facing us. Need I say more? There is much to be admired about a clear, clean face.

LEONARD BRANT

Post Falls