Observer Forum: Letters to the editor 06.29.15
In response to “Officials divided over memorial” (June 26):
Think twice about purging Confederate markers
If Mecklenburg Commissioners Chairman Trevor Fuller and fellow commissioners want to purge reminders of some of the more distasteful parts of history, there’s a lot more to consider than Confederate markers.
Thomas Polk Park at the Square has to go – it honors a Charlotte founder who owned many slaves.
Davidson has to be renamed, along with Davidson College and NoDa, because Gen. William Davidson’s family built its wealth on slave labor.
As long as the Commission is cleaning up unsavory history, we might also need to reopen discussion about a county-owned building named in honor of a former commissioner who was convicted and served time for sexually assaulting a high school student.
Thomas L. Bowers
Charlotte
Build a Carolinas Civil War museum, put flags and memorials there
The Holocaust Memorial Museum, National Civil Rights Museum, and Pearl Harbor and 9/11 museums are all memorials to injustice and atrocity.
None celebrate the Nazis, Japanese, terrorists, or bigotry. There are no flags celebrating either perspective, just a place for silent remembrance.
I propose that North and South Carolina compromise with construction of a museum memorializing the role of the Carolinas in the Civil War. Controversial flags/memorials could be on display for all to privately learn about each other.
Otherwise, we are doomed to perpetuate the hate and pass it on to future generations.
Steve LaDue
Fort Mill, S.C.
In response to “High court backs ACA” and “A major win for judicial restraint” (June 26):
Now let’s see Justice Roberts use that ‘judicial restraint’ on gun control
Hooray for Justice John Roberts! In a well reasoned argument for upholding the Affordable Care Act, Justice Roberts was cited by op-ed columnist Noah Feldman as employing appropriate “judicial restraint” in forming the opinion for the majority in this case.
Now if only Justice Roberts and others could use that same rationale in examining the issue of gun control and a sensible interpretation of the Second Amendment.
R. Charles Hudson
Charlotte
Some on Supreme Court trampled Constitution with ACA decision
Some Supreme Court members have to update their resumes. They’re now editors rewriting bad laws poorly written, and they’re rodeo riders.
They mount gallant white socialist steeds, trample the Constitution, and spread the word explaining what the law writers really meant.
Nancy Pelosi was semi-right: “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it...”
Even then, an interpreter is needed.
Ed Mesko
Charlotte
Get government out of the marriage business, it’s a religious ceremony
Marriage has for centuries been a religious ceremony. Issuing a license was a way to keep blacks and whites from intermarrying.
Government does not issue a license for other religious ceremonies, baptisms, bar mitzvahs, communions, etc.
The government should get out of the business of “legalizing” any marriage.
Allow churches that wish to marry gays to do so, and those that do not wish to would not – just as one church baptizes, while another does not.
Abolish legalized marriage. Indeed, government should not tell us who we can and cannot marry.
R.J. Martin
Salisbury
Court’s ruling on marriage sends us down a disappointing slippery slope
Now that the Supreme Court has forced same-sex marriage on this country, where does this stop?
What about two sisters getting married, or multiple partners?
Once we let go of the exclusivity of a one-man and one-woman relationship in marriage, why stop there?
If it is about love and commitment, then it is logical to extend marriage between two sisters bringing up children together, or two women and one man.
This country is no longer on a slippery slope to the sewer; it just fell off the cliff into the sewer!
Hartley Simpson
Harrisburg
This story was originally published June 28, 2015 at 12:00 PM with the headline "Observer Forum: Letters to the editor 06.29.15."