Advertisement

Letters to the Editor - Feb. 26

February 26, 2013

What do we really believe?


To the editor:

Watching the events of the last couple of months unfold, I have to ask the question: What do we really believe?

We all watched as the Newtown shootings unfolded. Days after, we saw the funerals and the tears of family and friends and a nation. We swore to never let it happen again. On that very same day, 3,500 children were killed. No funerals, no tears, no nation in mourning. Their innocent lives taken “legally” in the name of a right to choose. 

Listening to the speeches of President Obama and the first lady, and many others, I hear the subject of fatherhood come up a lot. How they love to tell us about the importance of a father in the family. They tell us it is scientifically proven that when there is a father in a stable family setting, children have a much greater chance at a bright and productive future. I believe this to be true. How do you go from this fact to saying it doesn’t matter who you marry as long as you love them? If two women marry, does that mean a father is no longer necessary? What about two men? Are two fathers twice as good? 

I remember a recent story in the paper about teen pregnancy in Washington County. The Board of Education seemed to wonder why children as young as 8 years old have already had a sexual experience. Remember, this is a generation whose lives revolve around technology, TV, the Internet, video games and smartphones. TV commercials have turned almost pornographic, and many of the video games children play have sexual content. We continue to insist how concerned we are for our children, yet we protect this filth and perversion under freedom of speech.

What do we really believe?

David Spade
Clear Spring


Better security, not proposed gun laws, is the answer


To the editor:

I am writing about the recent increase in gun laws brought on by the school shooting in Connecticut. This includes limiting ammunition magazine sizes and background checks for private gun buyers. I have been politically aware of these laws, and for two reasons consider these new laws inadequate.

First, the magazine size restriction is ineffective. A gunman now has smaller magazines. He could just save up and buy more from his source. And a person planning to use a firearm for home defense would need to purchase more magazines.

Second, they only make firearms harder to obtain by legal methods. A person can still acquire a gun through illegal means. However, if a person is planning to buy a gun for home defense legally, he must go through a longer process. This involves obtaining a license, purchasing the gun and then waiting a week for a background check.

In short, the magazine restriction will not resolve the problem. Stricter background checks will not solve the issue either. We should instead have better security in public places like schools.

Thomas Coe
Hagerstown



Legend of Japanese invasion based on Yamamoto’s words


To the editor:

A while ago, in a letter to the editor, someone stated that students of history know that at the end of World War II, Japanese generals said the reason they did not invade the United States was because the population was armed. I am a student of history and I’ve never heard that.

I do know that any invasion force would have to be resupplied across 5,000 miles of ocean, and that for the last 900 miles any resupply fleet would be under attack by heavy bombers. For the last 400 miles, they would be under attack by both heavy bombers and light bombers. And for the last 180 miles, they would be under attack by heavy bombers, light bombers, torpedo bombers, dive bombers, fighters and submarines. For the last 15 to 20 miles, in addition to all of the previous, they would be under attack by shore-based, long-range artillery.

A friend of mine told me the legend of the Japanese planning an invasion is based on a comment made by (Admiral Isoroku) Yamamoto. He said, “For us to win this war, we will have to negotiate the treaty in the White House.” The meaning of the statement was that the war was hopeless. American propaganda took the statement as a threat against us to enrage our people.

Russell Williams
Hagerstown


Presidents Day about much more than sales


To the editor:

It’s Monday, Feb. 18, 2013. Did I miss something this morning in The Herald-Mail? Today is Presidents Day, a holiday for most government agencies and many businesses and organizations. The only mention I saw in the paper this morning was on page B16 … “This is Presidents Day.”

Presidents Day is more than stores having another sale. It is an opportunity for all Americans to, if only for five minutes, reflect on and honor the greatness of our past presidents.

It was established to honor the birthday of George Washington (Feb. 22), our first president. When the birthday of Abraham Lincoln (Feb.12) was combined, the holiday became Presidents Day.

What an opportunity for the local newspaper to at least have an article about the history of Presidents Day. What did I see, however? Nothing. Only the four words on page B16.

We wonder why our country is declining; why the morals and ethics are in disarray; why no one cares about history; why there seems to be only love of self; why there is little pride left, especially among younger generations.

Perhaps if we start to make our citizens aware of our past and the greatness of our country and its beginnings, we will, in some small way, start to rekindle the pride that is waning.

I am not suggesting we not go to the mall or buy a new car on this special day, but I am suggesting we remember why we have that opportunity to do so — the freedom our great forefathers fought hard for us to have, hold and maintain.

Bill Reno
Hagerstown

Advertisement
The Herald-Mail Articles
|
|
|