ID requirement popular
The latest Rasmussen survey reports that 72 percent of likely U.S. voters support voter ID laws and don't think they discriminate against minorities or the elderly. But the Obama Justice Department led by Eric Holder, known for the "Fast and Furious" gun-dissemination debacle, does not care.
Although the voter ID requirement passed in Texas, the Justice Department is blocking its implementation. Our own Democratic governor, Bev Perdue, vetoed a similar measure that passed the legislature overwhelmingly.
In an era where you routinely show a picture ID to cash a check, use a credit card or board an airplane, it is ludicrous that the same would not be required to exercise our precious right to vote. If you are who you purport to be (and are voting once and in the proper precinct), you should welcome this requirement. To feel otherwise condones voter fraud.
To say that this common-sense measure disenfranchises minorities is another Democratic "red herring." Minorities should be outraged at such condescension.
MARY LOU WILSON
Winston-Salem
A culture of life
The March 24 Journal had a front-page article covering rallies that were held locally and around the country by religious groups opposing President Obama's inclusion of contraception services as part of the Affordable Care Act (" 'Standing up for our faith' "). The article includes the typical spleen-venting that has become a hallmark of such rallies since before the 2008 election. What it doesn't include is the facts.
Churches and other houses of worship are exempt from the rule. No individual health-care provider is forced to prescribe contraception against their moral convictions; and of course, no one is forced to buy contraception.
Twenty-eight states, including North Carolina, already require insurance companies to cover contraception, and North Carolina has religious exemptions identical to the Affordable Care Act. RU-486 and other drugs that cause abortions are not covered by this rule.
But hey, facts are boring, it's much more fun to stand on a street corner and scream one's lungs out about how Obama has declared war on Old Time Religion and cast doubts as to the president's faith.
The biggest disappointment in all this is that the church that has given the world Mother Teresa, Oscar Romero and John Paul II has allowed itself to be dragged into this circus.
Embracing a "culture of life" involves much more than opposing women's reproductive rights; it also involves social and economic justice, care for the environment and opposition to the death penalty as well as opposition to unjust war.
RANDALL PEGRAM
Kernersville
Deportation
It is not right for children to pay for what their parents do. But we need to either make these young people brought to the country legal or send them and their parents back to wherever. Something that should have been done 20 or 30 years ago.
BETTY COOKE
Pfafftown
Good comics
Thanks for publishing some of the comics that I read as a teenager in the 1970s, like "The Wizard of Id," "Beetle Bailey," "Rex Morgan M.D.," "Judge Parker" and especially "Doonesbury." It takes guts to print "Doonesbury."
Rural folks would really like to see "Barney Google" and "Snuffy Smith" return. I am a fan of "B.C." and would also like to see it come to the Journal.
CECIL FULP
Mount Airy
When Jesus returns
When Jesus Christ returns to rule the earth, there will no longer be $4 or $5 gasoline, food shortages with high-priced food, there will be no college professors who believe that they evolved, no Democrats or Republicans passing bad laws for the greedy to "get to the top 1 percent," no wars nor rumors of wars, no sexual freedom nor homosexual rights, no fixed global oil prices, no freedom from religion, no poverty nor unfair minimum wages, no bankrupt countries, no marriage nor divorce, no robberies nor murder, no abortions, no anything-goes religious rights, no beggars, no separation of church and state distortions and no more crooked, work-your-way-to-the-top CEOs.
The list could go on and on, but this is a good starting point, in spite of other crazy religious beliefs in various countries. The unbelievers will be in "the lake of fire" somewhere in outer darkness, remembering their bad choices. People will no longer be able to dodge the truth.
HAROLD D. PARKER
Clemmons
Sum It Up
The Sum It Up question from Sunday was: Do you think the Supreme Court will rule correctly on "Obamacare"?
It depends on who defines "correctly." Judging from the Supreme Court's decisions on Bush v. Gore and Citizens United , it is very likely the court will hand down a 5-4 ruling on "Obamacare" along the political fault-line of conservatives vs. liberals.
BOON T. LEE
Stop calling it "Obamacare." The president will not be your doctor. The Supreme Court will not rule correctly on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (real name) if questions asked by the conservative judges are any indication. Justice Antonin Scalia's hypothetical about broccoli was more like Rush Limbaugh than a "brilliant" jurist. No American should be comfortable with a Supreme Court justice who so arrogantly betrays his prejudices in public.
KAM BENFIELD
Since the Supreme Court's Citizens United vote, I have lost confidence in the high court. I hope and pray (yes, pray!) a majority of justices will render a decision of compassion for all Americans, especially "the least of these," realizing that President Obama genuinely cares.
ANNE GRIFFIS WILSON
It's hard to say, but we do need an affordable national health insurance plan. If the money isn't spent on this, the government will spend it on something else we may not need.
WILLIAM SAMS
Who knows? Anyone who answers with an absolute yes or no is basing their response on politics. I'm guessing that very few of us have a profound understanding of constitutional law, not to mention the interstate commerce laws. I know I don't. And how many people, other than devoted SCOTUS followers, could have foreseen the impact of the court's ruling in the Citizens United case?
CATHY HOOTS
Obamacare should be for all people. The Supreme Court decision will be made by lifetime judges. I hope the decision is a good one.
ELIZABETH R. ERVIN
Mr Parker, I think it was Nietsche who said: “One must separate from anything that forces one to repeat No again and again”.
ReplyDelete"The list could go on and on, but this is a good starting point, in spite of other crazy religious beliefs in various countries." No, your crazy religious beliefs will suffice.
"The unbelievers will be in "the lake of fire"...." that's just pure unadulterated mental and spiritual terrorism: ie if you don't believe the way I do, then you will suffer for eternity, People may think that being blown up in an instant by a suicide bomber is terrorizing but just consider that as opposed to burning in a lake of fire for eternity.
People will no longer be able to dodge the truth." If you knew your beliefs to be truth, you wouldn't have had to call it faith all these years now would you?
LTE #1... please do not compare our precious right to vote to opening a bank account, getting aboard a plane, or any other commercial transaction for that matter. Oh where will it stop, next thing you know, they will be requiring us to bring our beasts with us to polling place.
ReplyDeleteYes, Kam, the broccoli argument by Justice Scalia was laughable. If one goes to the emergency room, injured, with no insurance or ability to pay, they are still required to treat. If one is broke and starving and goes into a grocery store, they are not required to feed.
ReplyDeleteAs far as mandating people to be involved in commercial activity, the hospitals are already mandated to perform the commercial activity, and aren't "hospital corporations" people too?
DeleteThroughout the history of human evolution, religions have always been very slow to evolve, but they have and they do; history also shows us what happens to things that don't.
ReplyDeleteIt's so heartwarming to see that Rush and ALEC are now getting the attention they so richly deserve. Have a Coke and a smile, :)!
ReplyDeleteVoter ID must be trending on Fox & talk radio...have had a spate of letters about it.
ReplyDeleteI continue to compare voter ID and card check. Both are intimidation, but one is vote suppression while the other is "progressive social justice." Cynical hypocrisy by liberals.
DeleteHypocisy by liberals: I'll concede.
DeleteCynicism: Historically conservative.
Hi LaSombra!
DeleteI guess that depends on which conservatives to whom you refer. I once called myself a conservative, but many who call themselves conservative are indeed cynical. Thus, I claim a more centrist position, along with unaffiliated voter registration.
Oh my cousin Stab...union stuff is about private business...voting in public elections is a horse of an entirely different color...see US Constitution.
DeleteLogical fallacy = false analogy
Stab: If I claimed to not know you as a Centrist I would say your post in itself contains a hint of cynicism. What is the push for a voter ID if not to suppress votes? No ID=No Vote, right?
DeleteI received my new voter registration card in the mail today and plan to present IT and my current NCDL to vote next month. I'm giddy with anticipation.
LaSombra, you will not need either card, although the voter registration card makes it easier for the poll workers to check you in.
DeleteGovernor Perdue vetoed the voter ID bill, and despite repeated claims by the trolls that the legislature passed it "overwhelmingly", they did not even try to override.
I know it's not needed. I want to make a statement, though. My point is that in my entire adult life I've NEVER been asked to identify myself with EITHER a picture ID or a voter registration card to cast a vote, so it's NEVER been an issue of verification of identity, validity of a casted vote, or ease for the poll worker.
DeleteThere are zillions of reasons for the push on voter ID, but NOT ONE of them is reasonable and rational.
Maybe you should take your birth certificate as well, and a few sworn witnesses to your birth.
DeleteI can envision a Tea Party orchestrated American Republican/Fascist future in which your mother, carrying her picture ID and birth certificate, will be required to accompany you to the polls and swear before a magistrate that you are her natural offspring. Once your mother dies, you will not be allowed to vote unless you are a member of the American Republican/Fascist Party.
La Sombra, sometime back, I found the arguments of you and others persuasive enough to reverse myself on voter ID, and concede that it is vote suppression. I oppose voter ID legislation. Thus, I'm not sure about my hint of cynicism.
DeleteOT, yes, one is constitutional matter, but the other is not entirely business. Unions are not strictly business entities, being political organizations also, as witness unions' tie-ins to OWS and ACORN, and their massive involvement with Dems. Then there is the matter of intimidation, which you decry re voter ID or sonograms prior to abortions (an intrusion that I also oppose), but at which liberals wink and nudge wihen it comes to union bulllying.
Come on, Stab, give me a break...after 80+ years of relentless war on unions, just exactly what effect does card check have on the future of the nation? Near zero.
DeleteAnd you're going to tell me that big business is not political?
Real elections are another matter entirely. Remember what Senator Goldwater said about those grasping preachers. The 2012 election is all about their last gasp. They've already got the Supreme Court and the House...if they should somehow steal a few states and seize the White House and the Senate as well...happy days are here again, circa 1840.
I have the luxury of being able, at that point, to sell my businesses and move to a civilized country where I could watch from afar as the USA sinks into the Sargasso Sea. But most decent Americans don't have that option.
Stab: I viewed your 0816am ID/card check comparison as veiled cynicism until I read your response to Rush @0650pm, so I apologize for my cyber-rant. I'm trying, but it's hard for me to understand your comparison of the two. While both are politically motivated, one is driven by the need for exclusion while the other is inclusive. I agree that unions have outlived their purpose and that they amount to bullies, but in some small instances they still are very powerful tool in 'progressive social justice', as you call it. I am as passionate about the issue of voter ID as you are about labor unions, but I see very little similarities in your comparisons.
DeleteRush: The push is to provide identification to vote. I have no issue with it. What I have issues with is to push the issue as a veiled attempt to discriminate. If Amendment One passes, I fear voter ID will pass with ease. So, even though I acknowledge your attempt at sarcastic humor, it could become reality.
DeleteFolks, the issue is coercion. Unions seek to deprive free choice by intimidating people into signing on, which you do not address, OT. Voter ID likewise intimidates. It doesn't matter whether card check dramatically affects the country. It does matter that a party and like minded people think think that it's OK to coerce people into membership in organizations, undemocratically constituted ones at that, that use their money without permission for political purposes.
DeleteThat you ignore the intimidation and deprivation of true choice startles, as does Obama's support.
LaSombra, your comment that unions have outlived their usefulness is wrong to some extent. I work with union members and union reps every day. We do fine. People are entitled to freely select agents to represent them. Note I said "freely." But, having those agents imposed without free choice is another matter. Liberals champion freedom of choice and freedom of voting . . . Unless unions say otherwise.
I disagree that unions have outlived their usefulness.
DeletePerhaps some of the big boys are irrelevant, but the ones working for the lowest folks on the totem pole...waiters, waitresses, maids, fast food workers, janitors and other cleaners, bed pan emptiers, etc are just as relevant as any union ever was.
These people are being relentlessly exploited by the greedy in the same way that industrial workers were exploited from the 1880s into the 1920s.
Anyone who is knee-jerk anti-union can be categorized in one of two areas:
1. Big business lackey
2. Out of touch with reality
The war on unions has succeeded beyond its wildest expectations. Since Reagan took office in 1980, the balance of wealth has shifted dramatically in the USA, to the point that the 1% has more than tripled their share of the wealth, while contributing less and less to the national economy.
Tiny example: CEO of Bank of America, a failing company despite the Bush bailout, receives a five-fold increase in compensation last year.
If this continues, we will see a rise of union activity again, to the point where, as in the 1930s, big business has company thugs beating and murdering union organizers. Sit back in your comfortable office and rake in bucks for doing nothing much until the newly revived unions arrive at your door.
@Stab re card checks - - -
Deletedeprivaty of choice: check
intimidation: check
coercion: check
Re voter ID - - -
deprivaty of choice: check
intimidation: check
coercion: still debatable.
@Rush: Unions are still needed, but their political outreach is larger than their labor outreach. To illustrate:
I knew of a gentleman who worked in the telecommuncations industry and when the Baby Bell companies split he chose AT&T when given the choice. A year later he was caught up in the massive AT&T layoff. He eventually found a job at a rural telephone co-op, earning LESS THAN 25% of what his income was one year earlier. During his tenure at the co-op there was an attempt to unionize, and although it failed the union made a valiant attempt at negotiating salaries comparable to others in the same industry.
A couple of years ago I offered a job to someone that paid 10.25/hr. She declined because she had just accepted a union job at a Krogers in Virginia that paid minimum wage. Minimum wage is federally mandated, but she was seemingly happy with her choice, so I wished her well.
@Stab: I think that we are both saying the same thing, just from different perspectives. I agree that choice is key, but once union representation is in place, there is no longer any choice.
DeleteOT, you keep ignoring unions' insistence on coercing membership. You may class my anti union stand in either category, but how do you categorize shrugging at unions violating individuals' rights?
DeleteYou also ignore my comment that people have a right to FREELY select agents to represent them. Card check is not free selection. Why does that intimidation not affront you, along with the fact that the president of this country supports it?
Mr. Parker sounds a lot like The Constitutionalist from pre-facebook days?
ReplyDeleteYa know, I think you're right. The lake of fire thing is a dead giveaway...
DeleteIn any case, if heaven is filled with people as warm and generous as Mr. Parker, I'll pass. Thanks.
DeletePeople have no sense of history. Revelation was written during the Roman persecutions of the early church; I think the apocalypse story is very much an outgrowth of that.
People should worry more about how they're living their lives in the here and now.
Arthur, Arthur...you're forgetting that the two biggest religious denominations in the US, the Catholics and the Southern Baptists, prefer to ignore the teachings of Jesus, particularly the Sermon on the Mount. So it doesn't matter how they're living their lives in the here and now.
DeleteThey've managed to twist their theology around so that only one thing matters. Believe and ye are saved.
You can do anything you want six days a week...murder, theft, lying, cheating, hating...doesn't matter.
Just go to church on Sunday and repent and you're still on the road to heaven. If you're a Catholic you'll have to say a few Hail Marys...if you're a Baptist you won't even have to do that. But don't forget to put something in the collection plate.
Then you can start all over again on Monday with all new fresh acts of evil.