Martin is upstanding citizen
Robert Cordell Martin has been a real good friend of mine and my family for about two years. I truly believe he is being wrongfully accused. He is a good Christian man. Mr. Martin would give the last penny he has if he knew it would help someone else in need, and do without himself.
This is a true shame for him to have his name slandered in such a way. I don't know the woman who is accusing Mr. Martin of this, but look where she is. She is in jail. Mr. Martin is an upstanding citizen in his community who goes to church faithfully and would help anyone in any way.
Which groups really restrict choices?
After reading the recent column by Thomas Sowell, "Liberals don't mind abridging our freedoms," I felt an urgent need to reply. I quote from the article: "Most people on the left are not opposed to freedom. They are just in favor of all sorts of things that are not compatible with freedom. Nazis were free to be Nazis under Hitler. It is only when you are able to do things that other people don't approve that you are free."
People were free to be Nazis under Hitler, but they certainly were not free to be non-Nazis. (Also, since when were the Nazis "left"?) There are some members of major political parties who do not approve of a woman's freedom of choice. They assume the right to tell me what to do with my body and promote legislation that would curtail my freedom of choice.
The column also referred to the requirement some colleges and universities impose on students to do public service. Going to college is a choice and a privilege. It is a contract that provides an education for a price. If part of that contract requires public service, it should be honored. For instance, there are many lawyers' groups that require pro-bono services from their partners. If you don't like that, don't join the group. As for the rest of the article, yes, there are some who exploit public services, but there are far more truly needy people who have nowhere to go.
Bible offers economic plan
In efforts to preserve economic liberty I believe politics should reintroduce church and state by following the Bible's economic plan. It explains if a person is compelled to sell his assets to pay off a debt after seven years he could regain possession of it free of charge. This economic upheaval is known as the year of jubilee. The year of jubilee was designed to relieve the poor, and allow everyone in society to start fresh, debtless, after a seven-year period.
Our government continues to bail out major corporations with taxpayer dollars without relieving the taxpayers of their debts. If our tax dollars are used to bail out foreclosing mortgage companies and banks, then why do people continue to lose their homes? All loans and mortgages should be forgiven.
It will be possible to succeed or fail. Some people will become rich and others poor. Because the system starts over, economic life after jubilee is completed will preserve economic liberty. Debts would be cancelled, the impoverished can regain assets, and balance is restored, until the next disturbance.
Children's safety is top priority
I'm writing to comment on the snake in the dryer article, but I'm going to disagree with many of the opinions that have been voiced. I believe they did the right thing, given the situation, which is putting the safety of their children first.
No, they may not be snake experts and they shouldn't have to be. The bottom line is an animal invaded their home and they reacted the best way they knew how. They did not know how the snake might react, so they took action.
I can't understand why so many people are concerned about a snake's life vs. human life. What would the reaction have been if someone was hurt by this snake? Then everyone would have said they should have killed it. I thank God no one was hurt. I believe people should have their priorities straight and place more importance on human life.
Mary Ann Kennedy
Let's unite behind the new president
Charles Ansell and the many others, such as Russ Limbaugh, continue to try to keep this nation divided. I wonder what has Barack Obama done to him for him to hate him so. In retrospect, Obama's message of hope and unity was not much different than the message George Bush campaigned on and won. Their difference is in the competence of those with whom they surrounded themselves.
Obama has surrounded himself with people of substance, experience and impeccable qualifications, while the Bush cabinet had the Marx Brothers. Does it hurt Mr. Ansell that he and others were suckered for eight years and now their hatred has them so blind, they refuse to see or acknowledge the mess Bush has placed our great nation in.
Well, I am going to ask everyone to please stop the name calling and start the dialog. We need to communicate and look at one another eye to eye. We all have blemishes and scars, but under those marks is a person who deserves respect. Let's stop looking at the scars and find the person to embrace. We, as a nation, will need everyone pulling together to clean up this mess so we can rightfully reclaim our position as a world leader.
President-elect Obama has promised to tell us the truth. After 16 years of "he said, she said" and the deceptions that have claimed too many lives, isn't it time we give this man a fair chance to lead us out of this wilderness? As an American, fairness dictates you give him the opportunity because he won the election fair and square.
Vincent A. Blackwell