Regarding Chihn Le's June 19 letter, "Pharmacy trip held a surprising lesson," about his pharmacy shopping experience:

Tthere are two sides to every story, and some clarification is in order. Rite Aid's prices sound entirely appropriate to me: $72.99 cash quote (what they''d like to get for the medicine) and $53.99 through OPDP (billed online to get what the insurance thinks the non-network pharmacy should get, cost plus an insultingly modest mark-up).

Chinh then goes to his OPDP network pharmacy and pays $28 for the medicine. Chinh obviously is unaware of his benefit package, as he paid a $28 copay, and his insurance picked up the rest. It is wrong to villify non-network pharmacies by insinuating that they are overcharging for Nasarel, since the pharmacy's cost for the item is more than $28, a lot more.

Don Saleski

Registered pharmacist

Albany

A commuter train to Eugene? Great idea!

Commuter rail service via the Portland & Western Bailey Branch line never crossed my mind until it was mentioned in the paper (Editorial, June 7, "Wrong time to abandon railroad line"). What an great idea, even if it wouldn't come to fruition for some years to come! Portland's MAX train is currently building a line to Wilsonville.

If the Bailey Branch line is maintained for freight for the time being, it may one day be used for something like this - running to Junction City and Eugene. Going past the Bailey Junction turn-off toward Cebu and Dawson, the line stops in downtown Monroe; the tracks stopping abruptly at asphalt, then a short distance down the street, they continue for about 40 more feet and stop altogether.

The rails originally went further than this, and the pathway they took is still visible on Google Earth and, for the most part, unobscured save for some small trees. It extends about two miles south of Monroe, winding along a Christmas tree farm and between fields, and it stops in a grassy meadow near where the Applegate Trail road and the Mapleton-Junction City Highway cross.

Letting the remaining Bailey Branch disintegrate like the line that ran from Brownsville, under Interstate 5 at Bond Butte Drive (its overpass still remains) and wound down to Springfield, would be unforunate.

Ryan Thompson

Corvallis

Ignoring Pre Classic showed local bias

Joe Fulton's June 18 letter, "Why did G-T ignore great Pre's meet?, was right on! "Raspberries" to the Corvallis Gazette-Times' sports department for not acknowledging - let alone reporting - on the premiere (Steve) Prefontaine Classic meet in Eugene. Can't you be a little less parochial in reporting sports?

Ron Wrolstad

Corvallis

'Gay at birth' view is gaining ground

The debate involving gay marriage has recently sparked much discussion over the issue of homosexuality itself and whether it is a choice or biological.

While it probably varies for each person, from what I have been told it seems that in most cases it is not something chosen, but something that comes from deep within. Most homosexual men and women would probably agree. Does anyone "choose" to be straight? No, they simply know they are.

While not all the people who insist it is a choice are Christian, it does seem that they are the majority who hold that opinion. But interestingly enough, two prominent Christian leaders disagree. Alan Chambers, director of Exodus International, the nation's largest "ex-gay" ministry, says he still struggles with homosexual temptation. And the Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote "we should not be surprised" to find a genetic basis for sexual orientation.

It's certainly food for thought, when even these Christian leaders acknowledge that it is most likely biological and not a simply a switch you flip. I would encourage anyone doubting this to research it themselves. You can easily find the same article I did on the LA Times' Web site.

Anneliese Ames

Corvallis

AARP opposition to health reform wrong

Senate Bill 27, currently in the hands of the Ways and Means committee, offers Oregonians an opportunity to bring about a fundamental and long-needed change in our health care system. It would give the citizens of this state an active role in designing, debating and forging a health care system that adequately serves all of us. The AARP recently announced its opposition to SB 27 because, if passed, that bill would "dismantle Medicare." But that claim is far off the mark, as is apparent to anybody who bothers to read the bill. To be opposed to a bill is one thing, but to deliberately state a falsehood in order to win a point is another matter.

The AARP must indeed be desperate to resort to such tactics. Why might the AARP try to scare us senior citizens, who depend on Medicare, into believing that SB 27 would "dismantle" Medicare? Why does the AARP fear SB27? Apparently the AARP does not want us to have that debate or to have a hand in determining the structure of our health care system.

The AARP newsletter (Yes, I am a member) reveals a series of ads for all kinds of AARP-sponsored insurance - but especially Medicare part D health insurance. Obviously insurance (especially health insurance) is very important to that organization. If SB 27 were passed by the Legislature, the action which followed might eventually result in a reduction of the role private insurance companies play in our health delivery system. Could that be why the AARP is trying so desperately to derail SB 27?

Joe B. Zaerr

Corvallis