Miner Photo/Mitchell Batson

Jason Deremer of Bullhead City carries a decorative camel into the Mohave County Fairgrounds exhibit building on Wednesday as workers set up exhibits for the third annual Home and Garden Expo.

Attendees of the show at the Mohave County Fairgrounds can also watch demonstrations of composting and floral design.

They can hear Dave Owens, the "Garden Guy" from KTVK Channel 3 in Phoenix, talk about organic pest control and organic composting that attracts birds and butterflies.

The Kingman Master Gardeners will be on hand to talk about tree care, water and irrigation, soil preparation, fertilizers and growing asparagus and cactus.

The three-day show will offer something for everyone, organizer Judy Lent said.

She is vice chairwomen of the Home and Garden Expo Committee, which is part of the Mohave County Fair Association.

"This is something different for the community," Lent said.

"Attendees can see a lot of different things in one place."

Approximately 90 exhibitors will be selling everything from furniture, home decorating items and electronics to awnings, outdoor cedar products and spas and pools, Lent said.

Many local businesses and non-profit organizations will also present demonstrations.

Presenters include Kerry Raymond and her guest Cindy Levesque, who will share craft tips during "Koffee with Kerry," which airs on local cable television Channel 77; and "Kachina Kitchen," with host Earl Hamlyn and his guest, chef Gerard Guedon, of the Brunswick Hotel, who will prepare duck.

Attendees can learn landscaping tips from the Kingman Masters Gardeners and nursery owners.

Show hours are 10 a.m.

to 6 p.m.

Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

Admission is $2, with children 10 or younger free.

More unusual exhibits will feature cabins kit homes, safes, and steel buildings.

Barbecue food, roasted almonds and country fudge will also available.

A carnival at the fairgrounds is open from 3 p.m.

to 11 p.m.

today and Friday and noon to 11 p.m.

Saturday and Sunday.Movie, same-sex marriages go side by side

To the Editor:

As I understand it, there are always two sides: good and evil.

The Bible explains the two sides very well.

On one side there is sin, and sin is universal.

On the other side there is good or gospel.

The gospel is universal, but also conditional.

A person must believe in the gospel.

By the end of the year 2003, I knew that two issues would surface in 2004 and the media would milk the issues until the cows went dry.

One issue would be same-sex marriage and the other would be the movie, "The Passions of the Christ." The two issues play out simultaneously.

The movie was created to inspire and to make people realize what the gospel is all about.

The movie has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

(It's the Jews who hate the movie because they do not recognize Christ as their "Messiah." They are still waiting for their Messiah.)

There is an undercurrent occurring.

The movie is opening doors to Christians to make disciples – to explain the movie in greater depth.

In a Biblical sense, same-sex marriages are immoral and they ought to prohibit such marriages.

In the beginning God constituted marriage between man and woman.

As the year passes it will be interesting to see how the issues play out.

Johannes Johannsen


John Anastasoff a real angel at KRMC

To the Editor:

We would like to take an opportunity and thank everyone for his or her good will during my husband's illness and subsequent death.

Thank you to Kingman Regional Medical Center and especially to John Anastasoff, who took care of Bennie on the day he passed away, Feb.13.

John was kind and compassionate and helped all of us through a very sad day.

He explained everything to us, from what to expect and how to prepare for his passing, knowing it would be soon.

He made it easier to let go of our loved one; to us he was our guardian angel.

John had first met Bennie the day he passed away, yet he took such good care of him and of us.

The hospital should have more caretakers like him – ones who show their compassion for all.

John made a day of sorrow much easier to understand, and he allowed us to be at Bennie's bedside through his passing.

Thank you also to all of those who sent flowers and cards.

Our apologies if we have forgotten anyone.

Ruth Page and family


Ageless definition of marriage unchanged

To the Editor:

One way to approach the same- sex marriage debate is to think about something else.

So let's talk about welfare.

In the 1960s, welfare spending soared, tens of billions of dollars were spent to provide the poor with cash aid, social services, food and housing.

Eligibility rules varied but the bar was low.

Welfare recipients did not have to be employed or married to qualify.

They only had to be low income with children to care for.

All of this was urged as a way to help the least-affluent members of society, a disproportionate number of whom were black and female.

It isn't hard to imagine the objections a discerning critic might have raised.

Handing money to unmarried mothers without jobs, in effect paying for non-marriage and non-work would prove disastrous, our critic could have argued.

It will erode the recipients' work ethic and lead to massive illegitimacy.

By replacing working husbands with government checks, this Cassandra might have warned, welfare will fuel widespread family breakdown among the poor and lock in multi-generational dependency on government largesse.

You are paving the way for a crime-ridden underclass, which the advocates of welfare would have replied with derision.

"Alarmist nonsense! How is extending a helping hand to the needy going to threaten anybody's work ethic? Do you really think women will avoid marriage or bear out of wedlock children just to get a few dollars more?"

Cassandra would have lost that debate, but she would have been proven right.

The rise of the welfare state was a disaster.

It didn't happen overnight, but the war on poverty ended up doing great harm by topping the social values that had governed life in poor urban neighborhoods.

It eventually undermined those same neighborhoods and damaged the people who lived in them.

The adoption of same-sex marriage would likewise topple a long-standing system of values.

It would change the assumption and expectations by which society has long operated.

The central reason for marriage is to provide children with a mother and father in a safe and loving environment.

Society's ideal arrangement remains the permanent and fruitful union of a husband and wife.

That is the relationship in which society has its strongest survival stake – our legal system privileges traditional marriage in order to send the message that it is still, despite all the other choices, ideal.

Legalizing same-sex marriage would change that message.

It would signal we no longer attach unique importance to the union of married heterosexual couples.

It would affirm that same-sex unions are as valuable as a conventional marriage.

Its most dramatic impact wouldn't fall on the gays and lesbians; it would fall upon the children who would grow up in a world of normal homosexual marriage tomorrow.

Social behavior changes when society expectations and values change.

Teach children by example, as welfare did, that money can be had without work, and many grow up unwilling to work.

Teach children that a traditional marriage is nothing special and many will grow up unwilling to marry.

My foreboding is that a generation after same-sex marriage is legalized, families will be even less stable then they are today.

The divorce rate will increase and our children will be less safe.

To express such a dire warning is to be labeled an alarmist, a reactionary, a bigot, a homophobe or worse.

Similar slurs rained down on those, like the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who warned in the 1960s of the disaster that was coming because of welfare.

It is not bigotry to try and learn from history or to point out that some institutions have stood the test of time because they are the only ones that can stand the test of time.

A lot of things in American life badly need fixing.

The ageless definition of marriage is not one of them.

John Anastasoff


EDITOR's NOTE: This letter is being reprinted from Wednesday March 10 because an integral part of the letter was left out.

Apologies to Mr.