Letters to the Editor 05-29-1998
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
- Flag Etiquette - Moral Absolutes - The Blame Game - Marathon For Leukemia
Flag Etiquette
Editor, Times-Union:This letter will, I fear, offend some segments of local society, and for that I apologize.
Recent events involving deaths of law enforcement personnel, the "National Police Officers Day" and the deaths of school children, have all resulted in the flying of the flag of the United States at half-staff.
ONLY the President of the United States may cause the flag to be displayed at half-staff over federal buildings, military camps and Navy ships.
It may be flown thus for a period of mourning not to exceed 30 days for the death of one who served, or was serving at time of death, in a "national" capacity.
Examples: The crew of Challenger, Secretary of Commerce, Ron Brown (seated cabinet member at time of death), President Nixon and when time comes, President Reagan.
Cities throughout the nation had flags at half-staff during "National Police Officers Day," the city of Tampa, Fla., had flags lowered following deaths of two detectives, the city in Oregon lowered the flag following the killings/wounding of school children.
This is wrong! The flag of the United States represents the nation, it does not represent Tampa, Fla., Pedunk, Idaho, or any other city or county!
Local heads of government, cities, towns or counties do not have the authority to have flags flown at half-staff over local buildings.
Am I paranoid about the way our flag is displayed? Darn right!
There are many veterans and military retirees in this community and not one of us is entitled to have the flag flown at half-staff at our death(s).
We are, having honorably served our nation, entitled to military honors at gravesites, i.e.: firing squad, flag-draped coffin, folded flag to "survivor" and the playing of taps.
Only veterans of the armed forces are entitled to these "benefits" and we are extremely jealous of them.
"For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
Don Guard
Leesburg
Moral Absolutes
Editor, Times-Union:First thing every Saturday morning I read your "News Views." Thanks for your thoughtful opinions. May 23 I read "More Evidence of What We've Become," citing recent violent acts performed by children and youth. As you say, "We don't like to impose on anybody. We don't like to tell them what to do ... It's not politically correct to force a sense of morality on our youth ... There are very few absolutes. Very few rights and wrongs. There is this giant gray area of morality where we allow our youth to wander ... And of course, there is no fear of final judgment in many kids these days."
Many Americans agree with you (me too) and we often hear the warning: "We need to get back to moral absolutes!" But I wonder what people mean by that. There's probably a lot of variety in individual opinion. What one person considers moral, another might not. Who is to say?
It's eye-opening to read the Book of Judges in the Bible. It describes a disastrous time in the history of Israel characterized by violence, intrigue, moral decay, hatred, cruelty, poverty, national defeat and enslavement by other nations. (Sort of like us?) God's assessment of their situation was, "Every man did that which was right in his own eyes." They had no moral absolutes!
How come? A few generations prior to that time of turmoil God had given people some specific guidelines for living. We call them the Ten Commandments. Here they are:
l. "I am the Lord your God ... You shall have no other gods before me."
2. "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything, in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
3. "You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name."
4. "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy..."
5. "Honor your father and your mother..."
6. "You shall not murder."
7. "You shall not commit adultery."
8. "You shall not steal."
9. "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor."
10. "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or his maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor." (Exodus 20, NIV)
A few years ago these commandments were accepted as moral absolutes in our country, even by most people who didn't consider themselves to be Christians or Jews. Now we seldom hear them mentioned, except in the report of another lawsuit filed by the ACLU to have them removed from a school, a courtroom or a courthouse lawn.
Could this be part of our problem?
Mary Thompson
Winona Lake
The Blame Game
Editor, Times-Union:A child kills his classmates, and we ask who's to blame?
We can't blame the child, for he is too young to understand the ultimate results of his actions. Besides, he is only emulating the countless acts of violence he has seen on movie and TV screens.
You can't blame the media, for after all they are only providing us with as much sex and violence as they say we want. (Funny, I never recall them asking me if it was OK to produce a movie like "Natural Born Killers.") But to them it's all about profits and rating. Besides, it's the parents' fault, they should screen out all sex and violence.
You can't blame the parents. Besides, they both had to work to provide the things he wanted. Rather than the things he needed like guidance, morals and supervision, that's the school's job.
You can't blame the schools, they're understaffed, overcrowded and out of control. Besides, it was the courts who removed all discipline. And mandated that sex and drug awareness classes be taught. So if the schools had done their job, he would have known to have just said no.
You can't blame the courts, for they were only trying to protect us from ourselves. When they removed the Ten Commandments and all references to a higher moral authority, (except for, of course, man) from the schools and replaced it with the "I'm OK you're OK" philosophy. Besides, the commandment "thou shall not kill" may infringe on someone's civil rights. After all, it's been a long time since those commandments were written, and society has changed.
You can't blame society, after all, in an effort to make everyone feel good about themselves we had to lower the standards of decency to a level to which only the most depraved could not obtain.
Who's to blame? I suggest there is more than enough blame to go around, starting with the media. Who for years have put profits ahead of values and rating ahead of morals. (To me something is seriously wrong with this picture.)
The parents must share the blame, for not setting the proper example for their children. In some cases they are not interested in teaching and guiding but early providing.
The schools share in the blame because they have allowed the curriculum to become so diversified. That a child can take a class in unwed mothering, sex and drug education and graduate without knowing how to read or write.
Society in general must take its part of the blame. By society I mean you and me. As Americans we have sat on our collective butts and allowed this to happen. You see it takes more than a village to raise a child. It takes love, time and moral guidance.
The courts I think are mostly to blame, however. For it was the courts who removed all values from our government and our schools.
I fail to see where displaying the Ten Commandments is a violation of someone's civil rights. Unless the command "thou shall not kill" would deprive the child of his right to do so.
What about "thou shall have no other God before me?" Is this a violation? I suggest not. For whichever god you serve, you should put him first. "Thou shall not steal," "Honor your father and mother," "Thou shall not commit adultery." If any of these things disagree with one's civil rights, or one's religious beliefs, then perhaps they should think about making a change in their value system. Because theirs sounds dangerous to me.
Who's to blame? Who do you think?
Jack Engler
Warsaw
Marathon For Leukemia
Editor, Times-Union:On May 23rd there was an article on the front page of our Times-Union about a man, my brother, Christopher Brandt, who will be running in a marathon on June 20 in Alaska supporting the effort for leukemia research. Chris is running in the marathon instead of just gathering donations because he feels "it gives you a very very small feeling of what it feels like to overcome something that seems impossible to do."
Chris is $1,000 away from his goal of $4,000. Any donation would be greatly appreciated. If you are interested in donating please send a check payable to the Leukemia Society to Chris Brandt, 5726 Port Lillian, Apt. B, Indianapolis, IN 46224.
Thank you very much for helping those in need.
Robyn Wood
[[In-content Ad]]
Latest News
E-Editions
- Flag Etiquette - Moral Absolutes - The Blame Game - Marathon For Leukemia
Flag Etiquette
Editor, Times-Union:This letter will, I fear, offend some segments of local society, and for that I apologize.
Recent events involving deaths of law enforcement personnel, the "National Police Officers Day" and the deaths of school children, have all resulted in the flying of the flag of the United States at half-staff.
ONLY the President of the United States may cause the flag to be displayed at half-staff over federal buildings, military camps and Navy ships.
It may be flown thus for a period of mourning not to exceed 30 days for the death of one who served, or was serving at time of death, in a "national" capacity.
Examples: The crew of Challenger, Secretary of Commerce, Ron Brown (seated cabinet member at time of death), President Nixon and when time comes, President Reagan.
Cities throughout the nation had flags at half-staff during "National Police Officers Day," the city of Tampa, Fla., had flags lowered following deaths of two detectives, the city in Oregon lowered the flag following the killings/wounding of school children.
This is wrong! The flag of the United States represents the nation, it does not represent Tampa, Fla., Pedunk, Idaho, or any other city or county!
Local heads of government, cities, towns or counties do not have the authority to have flags flown at half-staff over local buildings.
Am I paranoid about the way our flag is displayed? Darn right!
There are many veterans and military retirees in this community and not one of us is entitled to have the flag flown at half-staff at our death(s).
We are, having honorably served our nation, entitled to military honors at gravesites, i.e.: firing squad, flag-draped coffin, folded flag to "survivor" and the playing of taps.
Only veterans of the armed forces are entitled to these "benefits" and we are extremely jealous of them.
"For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
Don Guard
Leesburg
Moral Absolutes
Editor, Times-Union:First thing every Saturday morning I read your "News Views." Thanks for your thoughtful opinions. May 23 I read "More Evidence of What We've Become," citing recent violent acts performed by children and youth. As you say, "We don't like to impose on anybody. We don't like to tell them what to do ... It's not politically correct to force a sense of morality on our youth ... There are very few absolutes. Very few rights and wrongs. There is this giant gray area of morality where we allow our youth to wander ... And of course, there is no fear of final judgment in many kids these days."
Many Americans agree with you (me too) and we often hear the warning: "We need to get back to moral absolutes!" But I wonder what people mean by that. There's probably a lot of variety in individual opinion. What one person considers moral, another might not. Who is to say?
It's eye-opening to read the Book of Judges in the Bible. It describes a disastrous time in the history of Israel characterized by violence, intrigue, moral decay, hatred, cruelty, poverty, national defeat and enslavement by other nations. (Sort of like us?) God's assessment of their situation was, "Every man did that which was right in his own eyes." They had no moral absolutes!
How come? A few generations prior to that time of turmoil God had given people some specific guidelines for living. We call them the Ten Commandments. Here they are:
l. "I am the Lord your God ... You shall have no other gods before me."
2. "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything, in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
3. "You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name."
4. "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy..."
5. "Honor your father and your mother..."
6. "You shall not murder."
7. "You shall not commit adultery."
8. "You shall not steal."
9. "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor."
10. "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or his maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor." (Exodus 20, NIV)
A few years ago these commandments were accepted as moral absolutes in our country, even by most people who didn't consider themselves to be Christians or Jews. Now we seldom hear them mentioned, except in the report of another lawsuit filed by the ACLU to have them removed from a school, a courtroom or a courthouse lawn.
Could this be part of our problem?
Mary Thompson
Winona Lake
The Blame Game
Editor, Times-Union:A child kills his classmates, and we ask who's to blame?
We can't blame the child, for he is too young to understand the ultimate results of his actions. Besides, he is only emulating the countless acts of violence he has seen on movie and TV screens.
You can't blame the media, for after all they are only providing us with as much sex and violence as they say we want. (Funny, I never recall them asking me if it was OK to produce a movie like "Natural Born Killers.") But to them it's all about profits and rating. Besides, it's the parents' fault, they should screen out all sex and violence.
You can't blame the parents. Besides, they both had to work to provide the things he wanted. Rather than the things he needed like guidance, morals and supervision, that's the school's job.
You can't blame the schools, they're understaffed, overcrowded and out of control. Besides, it was the courts who removed all discipline. And mandated that sex and drug awareness classes be taught. So if the schools had done their job, he would have known to have just said no.
You can't blame the courts, for they were only trying to protect us from ourselves. When they removed the Ten Commandments and all references to a higher moral authority, (except for, of course, man) from the schools and replaced it with the "I'm OK you're OK" philosophy. Besides, the commandment "thou shall not kill" may infringe on someone's civil rights. After all, it's been a long time since those commandments were written, and society has changed.
You can't blame society, after all, in an effort to make everyone feel good about themselves we had to lower the standards of decency to a level to which only the most depraved could not obtain.
Who's to blame? I suggest there is more than enough blame to go around, starting with the media. Who for years have put profits ahead of values and rating ahead of morals. (To me something is seriously wrong with this picture.)
The parents must share the blame, for not setting the proper example for their children. In some cases they are not interested in teaching and guiding but early providing.
The schools share in the blame because they have allowed the curriculum to become so diversified. That a child can take a class in unwed mothering, sex and drug education and graduate without knowing how to read or write.
Society in general must take its part of the blame. By society I mean you and me. As Americans we have sat on our collective butts and allowed this to happen. You see it takes more than a village to raise a child. It takes love, time and moral guidance.
The courts I think are mostly to blame, however. For it was the courts who removed all values from our government and our schools.
I fail to see where displaying the Ten Commandments is a violation of someone's civil rights. Unless the command "thou shall not kill" would deprive the child of his right to do so.
What about "thou shall have no other God before me?" Is this a violation? I suggest not. For whichever god you serve, you should put him first. "Thou shall not steal," "Honor your father and mother," "Thou shall not commit adultery." If any of these things disagree with one's civil rights, or one's religious beliefs, then perhaps they should think about making a change in their value system. Because theirs sounds dangerous to me.
Who's to blame? Who do you think?
Jack Engler
Warsaw
Marathon For Leukemia
Editor, Times-Union:On May 23rd there was an article on the front page of our Times-Union about a man, my brother, Christopher Brandt, who will be running in a marathon on June 20 in Alaska supporting the effort for leukemia research. Chris is running in the marathon instead of just gathering donations because he feels "it gives you a very very small feeling of what it feels like to overcome something that seems impossible to do."
Chris is $1,000 away from his goal of $4,000. Any donation would be greatly appreciated. If you are interested in donating please send a check payable to the Leukemia Society to Chris Brandt, 5726 Port Lillian, Apt. B, Indianapolis, IN 46224.
Thank you very much for helping those in need.
Robyn Wood
[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092