Justin belongs with Asentes, not with 'confused' parents

Justin belongs with Asentes,not with 'confused' parents
EDITOR:
I am writing in response to the ongoing adoption case of Justin Asente.
I have been following this since day one and cannot believe the antics the Asentes have been through just to keep this innocent child happy, loved and raised how he deserves to be raised.
In last night's paper it says that the birth parents didn't know what they were doing when they signed a somewhat confusing adoption paper. What kind of courts do they have in Kentucky? If I were that judge, I would be asking these parents if they know how to read. Did they think they were sending this little boy on a minivacation, or what?
What about the younger brother? Anyone with a brain would wonder why one child is given up so willingly and another is being pulled in the wrong direction. What kind of mother would take such a paper so lightly? What kind of parents would want one child and not the other? What kind of court would even consider turning this child over to people who are clearly "confused" about a lot of things in their life, especially the value, responsibility and blessing of having children who are happy and healthy.
The best thing to do for this child is to keep him right where he is. Sending him to "confused birth parents" will be a major mistake and surely affect this child's life. To these birth parents I say, "If you care at all about this child, let him go. Get your life together and, above all, don't have anymore children." To the Asentes, "I am thinking of you and praying that all will go as it should, and your son will stay right where he is, home.
LUCIE DiCIOCCIO
Boardman
Evolution is science basedon documented evidence
EDITOR:
In response to a June 11 letter, let me state first of all that micro-evolution and macro-evolution are facts.
Evolution as a theory is just as reliable as the theory of gravitation. Reputable scientists do accept evolution as a workable theory. And there is overwhelming evidence in support of evolution. Evolution does not rest on pure speculation but on documented evidence.
It is true that at one time Charles Darwin needed fossil evidence for some of his findings. Late in life he found the evidence he needed in the fossils of horses found in the Western United States.
Today, discussions of evolution among scientists do not come to dead ends. Today, leading scientists depend on the theory of evolution to produce benefits for mankind: drugs, antibiotics, new strains of animals and plants, etc.
Furthermore, Genesis is not history. It is mythological in nature. Here are a few observations on Genesis: Light was created on the first day. But no moon or stars or sun until the fourth day. How could there be day and night?
Genesis says that life existed first on earth and later the seas teemed with life. Geologic science says that the seas teemed with animals and vegetation long before life appeared on earth.
Genesis 1:20 says that the waters bring forth fowl that fly. But science tells us that birds did not emerge from the seas. (Just compare Genesis 1:20 with 2:19. The Bible sort of contradicts itself.)
In a recent discussion of science standards for Ohio public schools, one who represented the ID (Intelligent Design) position was asked, "Who was the designer?" Not wanting to bring God into the discussion, the IDer said it could be an intelligence from outer space.
To bring supernaturalism into Ohio schools as science would betray the intelligence of our teachers. Evolution is science It can be tested, replicated, and form a body of information for other scientists.
ROBERT E. HOPKINS
Hubbard
X The writer is a retired American Baptist pastor.