Margaret Bearlin, Ainslie

"How dare you," railed James Allen (Letters, October 13) in response to my comments regarding the anti-abortionists and Dr Wareham's prevention of war group. I dare, sir, because both groups probably consist of people with strongly held views on a social issue, and both want to use public "vigils" in prominent locations as a way to advance their views. You may feel that some genuinely held beliefs are superior to others. I believe both are entitled to their views, but I disagree with their methods. Dr Wareham and her colleagues were reportedly invited to join the public commemoration services on Remembrance Day [by AWM director Dr Brendan Nelson], but refused. Joining in with all the others in silent respect would have meant they would not have been noticeable and there would be no publicity.No, they want to stand apart, so that their presence would be obvious and their posters can be readily photographed and published, as they were last year. And that, Mr Allen, is when I believe it crosses the line to offensive, and why I dared to support the decision to ban their action.

Kym MacMillan, O'Malley

Even with mooted protections in law, a "Christian" school in Australia would not isolate or ridicule a gay kid, as Jenna Price provocatively suggests ("Do we want our taxes to go to schools that could isolate pupils?" (CT, October 12, p22).Jesus said let all the children come to me. Although Christian schools, by definition, can't and won't compromise their publicly stated beliefs, they actively take teachers and students from a diversity of races, cultures and faiths. Some Christian schools may be vociferously opposed to same-sex marriage, but they certainly don't line up or ridicule students who don't fit the Christian "ideal" for family, gender and sexuality. They take all starters and attempt to demonstrate God's unconditional love and forgiveness. They teach God's uncompromising truth and expectations in all areas of life. That includes productivity and recreation, self-discipline, honesty, concern and respect for others above that for yourself, and pure unselfish sexuality. But if a student or teacher with, say, an LGBTQI political agenda deliberately flaunts their sexuality (of any variety) in a self-centred way that deeply offends the school community, the principal or board after every attempt to be at peace with that student or teacher, should be free with impunity from the law, to ask them to leave.It happens in business, in sport and in political parties when an individual is disruptively out of step with the aims of an organisation, in what's still a free country.

David Renton, Tuggeranong

Thank goodness that proposed changes to laws will ensure that no school excludes students based on their sexual orientation. I was astonished that a religious school would even consider to ban such students. Particularly as the vast majority of students at school would not have had their first sexual encounter (particularly if under the age of consent) and would still be dealing with their sexuality whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. So how would religious schools identify which of their students are gay if the student has not revealed their orientation? Would it be based on their looks and mannerisms? So if a male student looks or acts effeminate compared to their male peers would that be justification for a religious school to exclude or expel them based on the "assumption" that their appearance and mannerisms would be confirmation of their sexuality? Similarly, if a female student looks and acts tomboyish and less effeminate than her classmates would that be justification to ban or expel her? I wonder how this would stand up in a court of law if such students were banned or expelled from schools based on an assumption? And why does this whole debate remind me of the persecution and banning of certain races based on their racial orientation, which continues to this day around the world. Please.These students are still children who are yet to become adults and are still finding their way in life. Leave them alone and allow them to grow up.

Tony Falla, Ngunnawal

Discussion about the cost of aged care should be counterbalanced by the contribution of grandparents to the economy while they are still active.Many of us willingly baby-sit and mind grandchildren, take them to and fetch them from school, thereby helping their children and their spouses to work full time.We may also take them to after-school activities, all of this as unpaid carers and unpaid taxi drivers.If we become incapable of driving, we'll be incapable of helping.Then it's time to help us in return.The last time I wrote to The Canberra Times about this, your sub-editor condescendingly gave it the title "Listen to us oldies". If that happens again, I'll hit him or her with my walking frame.

Susan MacDougall, Scullin

I'm happy to entertain criticism from Anthony Adams or anyone else provided they get their facts straight (Letters, October 12).

But, I have no need to defend myself about alcohol issues because when [I was] director, Drugs of Dependence, Commonwealth Health Department, I negotiated the introduction of low-alcohol beer and the tighter restrictions on hours when alcohol ads could be shown on TV.

Anthony reported 5554 alcohol deaths in 2010. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has reported 1366 alcohol-induced deaths in 2017 – a 75 per cent decrease.

We have not approached a similar percentage reduction in illicit drug deaths over the same period.

This year the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reported that in 2016 "there were 1808 drug-induced deaths, equating to 1.1 per cent of all deaths (ABS 2017) – the highest number of drug-induced deaths recorded over the past 20 years".

I haven't dealt in "rates" as Adam does, preferring "persons". So, on this basis it is clear that his claim that alcohol-related deaths appear to be more than double that of illicit drugs is unfounded and in error.

Colliss Parrett, Barton

Why is there so much fuss about Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi journalist for The Washington Post seen walking into but not out of the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul?

The suggestion and probable reality is that he has been killed. The fuss surely isn't about him being a journalist who has been murdered for what he reports, as unfortunately that's not uncommon.

The Committee to Protect Journalists lists 44 other journalists being murdered so far in 2018 and 46 in 2017, with names and details supplied as to who they were and what happened.

The International Federation of Journalists suggests larger numbers have been killed with 82 in 2017 and 73 so far in 2018.

There are at least about 100 journalists killed in just the last two years and these have not been prominent in the news despite even collegial support and even self-interest.

There must be another reason. It has been suggested that there is an unwillingness to upset the Saudi community and their lovely oil supply.

There is no proof to date of any involvement apart from the location where he was seen last.

There is, however, also no evidence that provides an alibi, another sighting or any contact in over a week, so it is likely that he won't be reporting on anyone in the Saudi royal family nor condemning them again.

This suggests foul play and the international community should step up to investigate, act and protect journalists.

When journalists are killed, freedom of speech is diminished and true freedom comes under attack and this is never acceptable.

D. Fitzgerald, Melbourne, Vic

Geoff Cass (Letters, October 10) seems to think there is some logic in stating that China has continued to construct coal-fired power stations without noticeably affecting Australia, therefore we can go ahead with coal-fired power without any bad result for anyone. He sounds like the school kid littering the play ground who justifies it by saying everyone is doing it: "Why should I pick up my rubbish?"

In fact China has annually increased its proportion of renewable sources of power. In 2015 renewables contributed 24per cent of power generation, and in 2017 the proportion was 36.6 per cent, with a target of parity by 2022.

China is catering for a population of 1.5 billion people, and growing, so of course it needs new power plants, whereas Australia has a mere 24.85 million.

We have plentiful resources for renewables, and the means to store power and release it. Why should we keep on littering the planet with coal mines and generators when even one of the big kids is doing their best to reduce the mess?

The cost of power is constantly cited as a reason to keep going with coal.

This is a political viewpoint from a government that wants to convince us that the cost of electricity is a worse evil than the effects of climate change.

If a sensible investment in renewables was adopted the costs would quickly reduce and supply would stabilise.

Climate change is not going away, and we will continue to feel the effects along with the rest of the world.

K. Calvert, Downer

Laurence Tubiana does herself no favours by lambasting the Australian government ("Accord broker says Coalition anti-science", October 4, p8) saying it "goes against the science" then saying it "...needs to listen to the science and the economics, and lead the country towards decarbonisation".

Carbon is a black, solid element whereas carbon dioxide is a transparent (across the visible and nearly all the infrared spectrum), gas molecule.

As far as the economics are concerned, Ms Tubiana's accusation is rather rich when the German Federal Audit Office recently reported the waste of money spent in renewables as "blatant disproportion to the hitherto poor yield".

In Australia, the only positive "economics" I have seen are the scoop RET windfalls for overseas wind turbine installers from Spain, Canada and New Zealand and the electricity price gouging from the electricity retailers.

Nothing for the consumer here.

John Morland, Curtin

Paul Keating's outrage at Malcolm Turnbull for not organising a further referendum on a republic is hypocritical to say the least.

Whilst he (Keating) pushed a republic continuously during his time as prime minister he never held a referendum although he was in office far longer than Turnbull.

It took John Howard to hold a referendum so that the banana-republic divisiveness created by Keating could be settled.

We believe that Bill Shorten will not prevaricate as Keating did and that, should he win the next general election, he will proceed to hold postal surveys on a republic leading up to a referendum.

Philip Benwell, national chair Australian Monarchist League, Sydney

WHO'S THE WHINGER?

Ian Warden would like the Letters page to be taken away from the over-70s "First World Whingers of Old Canberra" ("Why God spat the dummy", October 14, p19).

A bit rich coming from an over-70s correspondent whose articles, including Sunday's, do nothing but whinge about the state of everything in this country.

Alex Wallensky, Broulee

SMOKING ISSUE

M. Jarrett's letter on smoking (Letters, October 15) nailed it.

The only thing that should be prohibited is prohibition.

Michael Lane, St Ives, NSW

WENTWORTH FIGHT

The Liberals deserve to lose next Saturday after the PM treated voters in Wentworth as not able to make a well-informed decision.

If for no other reason than this many voters will make their vote a thumbs down to ScoMo for treating them like village idiots.

D. Fraser, Currumbin, Qld

SCHOOLS OPEN TO ALL

Any school receiving government funding should not be allowed to discriminate on the basis of the race, the religion, or the sex of students that are allowed to attend.

B. Peterson, Kambah

GOD'S PRIORITIES

As someone who cares about both gay rights and the desecration of icons and monuments, I was glad Fred Nile's prayers for rain during a major event were finally answered at Randwick just prior to The Everest.

I'll take it as God pronouncing on his preference for Mardi Gras over a pretty ordinary horse race.

Jeff Hart, Kingston

APT TIME FOR PRAYER

The news that the LNP lags far behind the ALP ("Coalition trails Labor 45-55 in latest poll", October 14, p5) must surely lead our pious Prime Minister to call for an immediate round of prayer to relieve his popularity drought.

Peter Moran, Watson

WARNINGS ILL-DIRECTED

Scott Morrison shouldn't be warning the voters of Wentworth; rather he should be warning his government that it needs to improve its policies on refugees and climate change.

Jeff Bradley, Isaacs

NOT ON MY RADAR

Never listened to him and never will so he won't influence my thinking or vote ("Facts, myths and the Jones factor", The Guide, October 15).

Allan Gibson, Cherrybrook, NSW

THE CANCER QUESTION

Interesting front page article ("Poisoned Ground", October 15, p1).

Of my family of four two of us developed cancer and we lived in North Lyneham 1987-1996.

Statistical anomaly or cause and effect?

Andrew Gordon, Tuross Head, NSW

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attached file. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 words or less. References to Canberra Times reports should include the date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).