Advertisement

Letters to the Editor 9/26

September 25, 2000

Letters to the Editor 9/26



Schools should allow prayer



To the editor:

We are learning about the Bill of Rights in government class. The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion thereof." Then, if this is so, why was prayer taken out of the public schools?

Every morning we pledge allegiance to our nation's flag including the words "one nation under God." Why can't we have a few minutes each morning for students to reflect, pray or, whatever, quietly to themselves?

With students shooting fellow classmates and teachers, maybe taking prayer out of the schools wasn't such a good idea. Surely a couple of minutes each morning wouldn't hurt the daily schedule or take away from home room or first period. What good is the Bill of Rights, and freedom of religion, if the school disallows prayer during school or school activities?

Advertisement

Kathleen Lynch

Hagerstown

Big Brother is watching



To the editor:

I was recently greeted by the County of Anne Arundel, Maryland, in the mail. They wanted to tell me how nice it was to have me drive through their part of the state. Enclosed was a photo of my car, taken from the rear, clearly showing my license plate number. How nice of them also to inform me that the photo was mine to keep as long as I returned a payment of $75.

This service was recently initiated in Washington County, all as the result of our ever-mindful state representatives who recently enacted legislation (I'm sure it was in cause of safety) to help out the county tax coffers. These laws permitted counties to set up eyes-in-the sky (video cams) at intersections to catch runners of red lights, without the use of a policeman. No one witnesses these violations except a camera! How "Brave New World" of them! Big Brother is watching!

The citation explains that this fine is more like a parking ticket than a traffic charge. There are no points assessed, but you may find your auto registration revoked if you do not pay. Now mind you, although the actual driver is unknown (the camera does not identify him), the charge is conveniently brought against the owner of the auto.

This was brilliant legislation, to say the least. But why not make it $150 while they were at it? I'd suggest that Mr. Citizen get into the habit of borrowing the neighbor's or your wife's car as often as you can. If could save you any responsibility with a photo session by a Maryland county.

Ned A. Garrett

Hagerstown

At least Cheney has run a business



To the editor:

I read with amusement Wm. D. Butts' letter of Sept 7. I guess people like Butts choose to be ignorant of certain facts. This allows them the ability to remain comfortable with their own biases.

Mr. Butts your knowledge of Dick Cheney is zero. In the early 1990's Mr. Cheney became CEO of a company called Halliburton based in Texas. This company performs construction and engineering services for all companies all over the world. Halliburton does not, however, produce one drop of oil. Cheney took a fledging company and turned it into a world leader with over a billion dollars in sales last year. Halliburton has tens of thousands of employees spread throughout the world. I'm sure the stock holders of Halliburton feel they got a bargain paying Cheney's salary of $1.3 million. I would!

Dick Cheney has not received one thin dime from any retirement package. He stated weeks ago that if he is elected vice-president he would give up the $20 million retirement deal. Butts is guilty of spreading false and misleading information about a guy he knows nothing about. The media bias does exist Mr. Butts, and they are spoon feeding you every word. You just don't know the lies you are swallowing.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney both have done something that neither Gore or Lieberman have ever done. And that is run a business. Both Bush and Cheney have had to meet payroll and deal with government regulation and taxation, something a career politician knows nothing about.

Where was Albert Gore when on his watch as vice-president the Oval Office became the Oral Office? I guess Gore can always say "there is no legal controlling authority" to compel him to stand up for the truth.

David C. Ditto

Hedgesville, W.Va.

The Herald-Mail Articles
|
|
|