- Article Search
- View More Photos
- School Links
- About Us
- Helpful Links
- Place A Classified Ad Now!
Letters to the Editor: February 14, 2014
Submitted by West Valley View on Thu, 02/13/2014 - 10:00pm
Becoming more Democratic
Who were the Constitutional Convention delegates describing by using the phrase “We the People” to open the Preamble of the U. S. Constitution? Were they referring to themselves or to the politicians of the time? Or were they thinking of today’s politicians, constitutional experts, lawyers and judges, since they would no doubt be the people most engaged with and responsible for its meaning? Of course not but aren’t these the people who hold the destiny of our constitution in their hands?
In 1787 “We the People” though symbolic, introduced a completely new concept in governing a country and a passion to make the “Grand Experiment” work. Today the words are a part of history, taken for granted with no real connection between the people and the way our representative form of government operates. To make matters worse, our elected representatives think the Constitution is a document that they own to grant us our rights. It is nothing of the sort. It is instead, the rule book by which the federal government is to conduct the business of the people. Let us remember the states and the delegates representing them did not trust central government.
Certainly the delegate’s use of “We the People” indicates ownership of the Constitution. Unfortunately, “We” haven’t the means to exercise “Our” ownership. If our country’s intentions ever become one of a more democratic form of government than constitutional conventions held on a regular basis could be the ownership tool. Attended and conducted by every day Americans, no politicians please. This would give the American people the ownership that “We the People” so infers. To own the document by which our federal government is ruled and making the Constitution relevant to our times. Thus becoming a more democratic republic through ownership, responsibility and inclusion.
Don’t lump us together
Mr. Cranford, please, stating that the Atheist’s are in cahoots with the radical Muslims in order to “destroy us” is wrong on so many levels I don’t know where to begin.
First, I’ll state as an Atheist, I strongly believe you have every right to practice whatever religion you want to if you feel it enhances your life. However, religion has no place in our Government or schools. Our founding Fathers in their infinite wisdom saw the problems that integrating religious practices with government and educational practices create. We have to look no further than the Muslim Countries to confirm their wisdom. Second, I assure you that neither I nor any other Atheist I know has any desire to injure anyone due to our beliefs unlike the religious fanatics in the world.
As a Veteran of the United States military I freely wrote that check that if cashed I would been one that died for the freedoms we enjoy. I just choose to believe that science trumps faith, please do not lump everyone that does not share your beliefs into a radical group intent on doing harm to the United States.
How would you like it if I grouped all Christians into the Westboro Baptist Church group? I’m sure you know they are a Christian group known for their extreme bigotry and hatred. Horrid people and according to Proverbs 10:12 - Hatred stirreth up strifes: but love covereth all sins.
Yes, I’m an Atheist that has read and can quote the Bible; it’s a great book, a classic, full of life lessons but so is Steinbeck’s “Grapes of Wrath”. I won’t let either run my life or define who I am.
Roger L. Reeves
Atheist letter was wrong
Mr.Cranford of Goodyear is incorrect in saying that atheists “have been plotting for years to destroy [Christians]”. Atheists prefer the use of knowledge, common sense, and effective communication in order to take in the world around them. They are not slave to a book written thousands of years ago by men taken in by the supernatural and unexplained. There is no war to speak of. And Muslims certainly are not helping Atheists to that end. Non-believers have always been the ones to be persecuted throughout history by most major religions. Sir, you are stoking fires that have not been lit.
There was certainly no “declaration of dependence upon the Almighty God” by this nation’s forefathers either. The Declaration, in no way, cites God or religion as a means to word our resolve as a nation. Our forefathers understood that governments created by humanity derive their powers from the consent of the people being governed, not from God or any gods or religion(s).
A matter of degree
In his February 7 letter Mr. John Flynn entertained us with his usual and predictable Progressive talking points; and, finished by saying that the debate between Conservatives and Progressives is the “matter of degree” government should have in our lives.
Well said, John Flynn. In fact all of my letters ever written to the View about Progressives could have been entitled “A matter of degree” The founders took a long time to establish our Republic because they feared a strong Federal government. That was a “matter of degree”. The Bill of Rights says Government shall not do certain things, and enumerated individual rights. That is a “matter of degree”
When fully implemented, Obama Care will account for a third of the entire economy. That is a “matter of degree” as well. If Obama tries to rule the nation with executive orders and by pass the legislative, that is “a matter of degree” as to Presidential power. When Progressive mayor Bloomberg tells New Yorkers how much soda they can drink, yea that’s a big time “matter of degree.”
Clearly, the Bill of Rights, defines the matter of degree of power the Federal government shall have. The problem is Progressives have been illegally usurping it for years. That is not a” matter of degree “. That is the truth, and it’s name woud be TYRANNY!
Liberalism, Socialism, Communism, is also just a matter of degree. Progressives could show their love for country by respecting the limitation of power the Constitution gives to the Federal government. When will that happen, When pigs fly, ? Until then, remember it was Thomas Jefferson who told us that the best government is that government which governs least.
IRS should be nonpartisan
The Internal Revenue Service should be an autonomous government nonpartisan agency with a finely drawn mandate with not political agenda nor union affiliation responsible only to the American people under enforceable criminal penalty of Law.......
This agency has enormous legal authority and provides an essential service for any successful nation. It’s loyalty to the rule of law and the people of the United States of America must be absolute. The public employee’s union creates a political element and a un-necessary distraction from the purpose and goals of this powerful, but important agency.
The Internal Revenue Service must become distraction free (no unions and total autonomous) such at the Federal Reserve but not to the extent of the Supreme Court. Leadership appointment by way of the President and Congressional approval for a six year term.
The Internal Revenue Service must be removed as a political weapon for misguided of purposeful political use and advantage.
Time to be moved rebuttal
Its time that Americans realize and accept that America is a multi cultural society. This means freedom of religion for all. This includes all religions and the freedom to believe in no religion which includes no belief in a God at all. We have the right to practice our religion and this is what the founding fathers intended and one of the reasons immigrants came to America. It also means that public places and institutions do not espouse adherence to any single or particular religion. Thats what churches, synagogs, mosques, temples and other places of worship exist for. Government and public institutions need to be secular to meet the needs of all citizens of our country and as a citizen that wants to include all, we should be thankful for it.
What is poor judgement and questionable journalism is for WVV to publish what is at worst hate speech and at best the raving of a paranoid schizophrenic. The letter includes the idea of atheists and muslims plotting to destroy christians and advocates violence with the “until the shooting begins” comment. This person needs psychological treatment not the WVV to help move him forward with his delusions.
To me the Christian foundation that the writer refers to that our country was founded on is love, charity, acceptance and understanding of one another not hate, conspiracy and delusion.
Bill doesn’t go far enough
Great idea, what a concept. Why not ban “both” texting AND talking on a PDA, Cell Phone etc while driving?? Driving a motor vehicle takes one’s utmost attention and should not include talking on a phone or texting while driving. If it is “that” important there are more than ample opportunities to pull over and take care of whatever it was that was so important without putting anyone in harms way. Driving is a privilege and should not be taken for granted. The penalty should be costly and leave an impression on the violator. So why not make it a $500 civil penalty? But then my question is how is this new law if passed going to be enforced. A lot of the existing driving laws aren’t being fully enforced now (by no fault of our short staffed and much appreciated Police Officers) so what good is adding just another new law? Laws are violated each and every day so adding a new one without the method or commitment of enforcement is as worthless as the paper it’s written on.
Rate this article: