STILL AS SWEET

I am glad to hear you all at the Planet will be returning [in September] to your former moniker (Editor's Note, "What's In A Name?" by David Warner, May 31-June 6). My excitement is mostly due to nostalgia. I began reading the weekly in high school (when it was called Creative Loafing), and that is also when I began to think independently and realize my parents were not right about everything. I also realized that I could get a lot more useful information and entertainment from a newspaper than I had before. Up until that time I had only read the Tribune for its comics and occasionally Steve Otto. I have been a faithful reader, but I do secretly despise the film rating scale. Stellar through Uranus? Manna From Heaven through Sweetbread is way cooler.

Jeff Novak

Tampa

First, thanks for the explanation on the banner error. I was one of, what, 99.9 percent of your regular readers looking for the article explaining the name change. But before doing that, my first reaction was to look in the back to see if Merl Reagle's wonderful crossword puzzle was there. You see, I was in Atlanta a few weeks back and grabbed a copy of the just-published Creative Loafing one Thursday thinking that I'd do this week's puzzle on the flight home. To my surprise and disappointment it seems that Creative Loafing's management is depriving their Atlanta readers of one of the best features in the Weekly Planet. So seeing the Creative Loafing banner struck fear into me that I might be picking up a paper with other similarities to the Atlanta version than just the name. Needless to say, my greatest fears were, thankfully, not realized. Bottom line: I don't much care what you call it; just keep the content, including Mr. Reagle's crosswords. Thanks for the great contribution you and your organization make to our community.

Art Nordlinger

Via e-mail

SEPARATE FAITH

When I saw the title of the cover story ("Armageddon For the Religious Right," by John Sugg, May 24-30) my first thought was "Hallelujah!" I am getting frustrated with this subject's dominance in our nation today and feel the need to pose two questions: 1. Why do preachers keep trying to creep into office? and 2. Why is Christianity the ONLY faith which concerns the separation of church and state debate? Are Christians the only ones exercising their constitutional guarantee of "Freedom of Religion?" Leon and Darlene Pondo are quoted in Sugg's article as saying, "Separation of Church and State? Where does that come from? It's not in the Constitution." Besides the fact that it IS, I can cite three other reliable sources on the matter: Christ, the early Baptists and the Founding Fathers.

It was Christ himself who first advocated Separation of Church and State when he said, "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto the Lord that which is the Lord's." For legislative proof, read article 11 of the Treaty Of Tripoli signed by John Adams, which reads, "The United States is not in any way founded on the Christian Religion." If any of them (Founding Fathers) knew about Bush Jr.'s faith-based Initiative or the likes of Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority, they would crawl out of their graves.

The loudest voices preaching Christian values for political agendas seem to come from Southern Baptists, which is both sad and ironic. In their early days, the Baptists were among the staunchest advocates of separation of church and state. In more recent years, however, the Baptists have been taken over by a fundamentalist faction that believes the Bible to be the highest and ONLY book of law and all other authority must bend in acquiescence.

Before anyone lights a fiery cross on my lawn, let me clarify that I am NOT saying eradicate religion entirely. I am merely saying keep it in the Church and OUT of the government.

Victor Grigorii

Sarasota

CORRECTION

In last week's cover story, "The Must-Do List," we incorrectly stated that St. Pete Shuffle is open from 6-9 p.m. Fridays. The correct hours of operation are 7-11 p.m. Fridays.

This article appears in Jun 7-13, 2006.