Capital Region

Letters to the Editor Friday, July 22


We must take better care of our retirees

Father’s and Mother’s Day. We visit them with gifts. But we have completely forgotten their reality.
They are living on an average $10,000 annual pension. That, and their Supplemental Security Income (SSI) are all they have to live on since retirement. That could have been 20  or 30 years.
Trillions have been spent on everything except their well-being since they’ve retired. The SSI cost of living adjustment was inadequate for today’s financial situation.
The stimulus checks were heaven sent for all of us. But for seniors with huge medical expenses, a quick fix doesn’t help.
A permanent monthly increase for seniors earning less than $50,000 can be pro-rated to their income. It would be a lifeline that would preserve their quality of life.
NASA and many others spend endlessly. They look at the stars. How does that help seniors?
During the Depression, whole families, including grandparents, lived in flats meant for three. We are slowly trending back to that substandard way of living.
Our government must help those that have been left behind.
They are too proud to ask for help, and we are to blind to the inevitable future for them.
Charity starts at home. It’s about time we face reality and make that simple statement true in America.
George Hebert

Government and religion go together

The Gazette on July 7 featured two opinion essays (“Court whittles away at rights of accused” and “Heart of the praying coach case was based on myth”), which criticized the Roberts Court’s failure to defer to precedent.
Like the Roe v. Wade, and NYSRPA v. Bruen decisions, the courts’ findings on public prayer and the Miranda precedent relies on the actual text of the U.S. Constitution.
In the mid-20th century, the Supreme Court, seeking to right perceived inequities, scorned the plain text of the document.
In Miranda, the Warren Court held that a suspect questioned in custody was presumed to be coerced. The Fifth Amendment does not address police interrogation but rather specifies, ”No person … shall be compelled to be…witness against himself.”
There is nothing with respect to an affirmative warning.
In the Bremerton School case, the court found that the school had prohibited Mr. Kennedy’s free exercise of religion, which is expressly forbidden in the plain text of the First Amendment.
In 1802, Thomas Jefferson referred to such a wall, but nothing in the Constitution limits public prayer or constructs a “wall” between church and state.
To the contrary, in 1788 several states had state-sponsored religions, and public prayer by public officials was an everyday occurrence.
In 1947, in Everson v. Board of Education, the court refused to prohibit public transportation of students to religious schools.
The concept of an agnostic Constitution is a product of the godless left and belongs back in the communes of the 70s.
Art Henningson


Rules for commenting:

The Gazette will not tolerate name-calling; profanity, threats; accusations of racism, mental illness or intoxication; spreading of false or misleading information; libel or other inappropriate language in any form, and readers may not make any such comments about or directly to specific individuals.
Readers who violate the policy will be warned and then banned.

Categories: Letters to the Editor, Opinion


Karol Newton

Art Hennungston  your letter is the perfect example of why there is the “separation of church and state.”  When the constitution was written the founding fathers clearly did not want them combined.  You want them involved?  then the church MUST pay its  fair share of taxes and we know that will never happen.  The  church can’t even pay the St Clare retirees but they certainly will go to the wall protecting the pedophile priests 

Who Ville

The coach wasn’t engaging in personal, private prayer, which every American should have a right to, and to whom the school had made reasonable accomodations for.  What he was doing, was insisting that his players join him at the 50-yard-line after the game, to engage in joint audible prayer in front of the entire crowd, and to which he admitted was doing for the “betterment” of his athletes.  Many students of differing faiths admitted to going along with the coach in fear that their playing time would be affected.  That’s not freedom of religion, that’s coercion.  If the coach was Muslim and insisted on post-game prayer, I’m certain these same folks would be saying that the coach was engaging in indoctrination.   

I wanted to take up Mr. Henningson’s letter for its mealy-mouthed attempt to leverage his religion into our laws…then I got to his last sentence and where he reveals he’s not as serious as he wants to appear, nor is he as Christian as the Christ I was raised with.
The so-called Christians we are now as a society being accosted by are best characterized as simple bullies, and Henningson shows that in spades.
The Christ I knew and the God I trusted were not devious, intolerant nor coercive. What passes for “Christian” now too often is just that.

Leave a Reply