I read the editorial "Editing art" (SN 4/29). What it lacked in relevance, it made up for with muddled thought.

As a father of four, I am in favor of any technology that assists in limiting access to what I feel are objectionable parts of a movie. The author of the editorial believes that to use this kind of technology is an abrogation of my parental responsibility. I see it as a tool for exercising my responsibility.

It seems to me that the movie industry would be happy that I would try to snip a few minutes of a movie rather than not let my children see it at all. An example of this would be permitting my children to learn the lessons in "Saving Private Ryan" without learning what the literal meaning of "snafu" is. This technology does little to diminish the overall "art" and goes a long way toward making the movie accessible to a younger audience.

I doubt that most movie producers are so wedded to the artistic value of a momentary nude scene that they will willingly forego a potentially larger market.

As for impugning President Bush, I think you created a straw horse and then conveniently kicked it over. I support most of the president's policies, but even if I did not, I think I would pick at the parts of his agenda which will have a real and lasting impact.

Carl Woodard
Mason resident