Recent articles in the PG have cited the reality of hazardous chemicals being released into the air and water by Marcellus Shale gas well development. Apparently, there is some speculation about whether the "hazardous chemicals" can cause ill health to people. I cannot recall a case where hazardous chemical contamination was a benefit to people, even in small quantities.

The bottom line -- we have no idea what kind of hazardous chemicals are being dumped into our rivers. I conclude that this waste may jeopardize potable water supplied to our homes, workplaces and schools. If the chemicals cannot be removed before the waste is dumped into the rivers, then how will our utility companies remove them? It is true that our tap water goes through a thorough filtration process, but how can our treatment plants filter out new high-tech chemicals if they have no knowledge of them? If the chemicals were designed to dissolve solid rock hundreds of feet below the surface of the earth, we can't be talking about Coca-Cola.

Through science, we know that hazardous chemicals in our environment cause cancer, birth defects and other illnesses. How many people are we going to put in harm's way for a temporary supply of fuel? Is it fair for one group to profit from the Marcellus Shale developments while the greater population is faced with a possibility of long-term suffering?

The logical next step in Marcellus Shale development would be to scrap the project and work on an energy solution that is safe and sustainable. Why are we letting the gas industry put our lives in jeopardy?

TOM SARVER
Sewickley

Cemetery drilling

In recent years, the popes have made it clear that the protection of the environment is a religious and moral issue. Marcellus Shale drilling is still under investigation as to its effect on water, air, soil and neighborhoods. In fact, there is strong evidence that this drilling is often a disaster. But like mountaintop removal of coal, the lure of money is hard to resist.

If we Catholics are to be concerned about and work to protect, the environment, why is it that the Catholic Cemeteries Association of the Diocese of Pittsburgh is giving such a bad example by leasing our cemeteries for possible drilling? It has a board of directors, but who are they? Whom do they consult? Was the justice and peace office of the diocese consulted? Once again, it is an issue of "transparency versus secrecy" in the Catholic Church.

I would send this letter to the Pittsburgh Catholic, but it does not have a "Letters to the Editor" section. That is indicative of another need in our church family: dialogue among all concerned.

REV. NEIL McCAULLEY
Uptown

Unfair singling out

In the wake of the ground zero mosque project controversy, popular conservative syndicated radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh (who is against the project) recently commented that while there may be moderate Muslims, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.

I am not sure why he singled out Islam, for his comment also applies to other religions. For example, in line with Mr. Limbaugh's comment, while there may be moderate Christians, Jews or Hindus, there is no moderate Christianity, Judaism or Hinduism. Notably, while the U.S. Constitution is subject to amendments, ideologies of the various religions inherently aren't -- by design.

For the sake of fairness, and as cliche as it may sound lately, Islam should not automatically be associated with terrorism. What's important is to acknowledge that the vast majority of Muslims are moderate Muslims, regardless of whether they are vocal about their disapproval of the ideologies and actions of extremists (who, by the way, could just as well be Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, etc.).

NASH KHATRI
Irwin

Troubling notions

I am writing in response to Susanne Kline's July 22 letter ("Opening Wounds"). Her reasoning for why the Cordoba House mosque must not be built is both logic-free and troubling. First, she cites "the vast number of Americans" opposed to it. In this country, the religious rights of a minority group are not up for a popular vote.

The writer continues: "A proposed Roman Catholic church in Mecca would likely encounter greater vitriol than this mosque." This may be true, but last time I checked, the religious intolerance of other nations has no bearing on our constitutionally guaranteed right of religious pursuit.

Lastly, she asks why the developers "would choose a site many view as hallowed ground." This mosque, a place of worship, is a better fit for "hallowed ground" than the gentleman's club and gambling operation that are in the same vicinity. (Where's the uproar over that?)

This letter is not meant to downplay the significance of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. I understand why many Americans are speaking out passionately against the development of the Cordoba House. It is their First Amendment right to do so. But that same amendment also guarantees Muslim-Americans the right to freely practice their religion, regardless of how many people disagree with it.

FRANCISCO RIOS
East Pittsburgh

Radical or not?

The controversial proposed Islamic center in Manhattan will be an expensive project to build. It could be very interesting to follow the money and to see who is funding the project. Are the funders moderate Islamic individuals and organizations or radical? If they are radical, how much influence will they have on the center's policies, teaching and preaching? This may be more important than the center's location.

MELVIN WEISS
Oakland

Annual short shrift

Frankly, I'm confused. Your lead story on Sunday, Aug. 29, was "Thousands Fill National Mall for 'Honor' Rally," complete with two large photos of the thousands who attended. The narrative was lengthy and thorough. Why is it then, every Jan. 22, the Post-Gazette refuses to give similar attention to the tens of thousands of Americans who descend on Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life?

The numbers of marchers are significant and the concerns of the pro-life march are concerns that much of the Pittsburgh population share. It saddens me that every Jan. 23, I have to look hard to find an article on the March for Life. Do you think you can do better this January?

ANDREA SEEWALD
Squirrel Hill

Both sides of the Middle East conflict must be considered

George F. Will is in serious need of a history lesson regarding the creation of Israel and the current conflict with Palestine. His column "Security Gamble" (Aug. 20) is filled with historical inaccuracies. True, there is a conflict between Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, which resulted in 1,000 Israeli deaths since 2000. Acts of suicide bombers are indeed shameful.

However, this conflict is not simply one-sided with Israel the victim, as Mr. Will indicates. More than 6,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel in that same time. Palestinians are victimized by the Israeli demolition of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Israel's construction of a Separation Wall creates multiple checkpoints turning what should be a 20-minute trip to school or the hospital into a three-hour humiliating ordeal.

What's more, this wall does not follow the 1967 borders; rather, it haphazardly meanders through the West Bank grabbing land for settlers to live while splitting up Palestinian villages and destroying farms. This action is in direct violation of U.N. Resolution 242.

Look at a map of the Middle East prior to 1947 and you will find Palestine. This was a place where Christians, Jews and Muslims all lived. This balance was disrupted when present-day Israel was created based on the Zionist philosophy that started with Theodor Herzl (who was Hungarian) in the late 19th century to create a mass Jewish migration to Palestine. Jews were the minority, so more than 700,000 native Palestinians were forcibly removed from their homes and villages without any compensation.

Since the state of Israel was created, both sides of the conflict failed to recognize the humanity they share. Thank God there are voices that have embraced nonviolence and meaningful dialogue.

DAMIAN GEORGE
Beechview

Town Talk, a discussion forum on issues of the day, is featured exclusively in the Opinion section on PG+, a members-only web site from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.