In the Nov. 1 letters to the editor, Ken Plants chooses to define his version of what U.S. values are. In his piece, headlined “Republicans not behind U.S. values,” he attempts to outline why.
His first references to support his thesis is to use snide references that Republicans do not support freedom because they are against gay rights and women’s rights. Just exactly what are gay rights? It seems to me that gays enjoy a plethora of rights, except the one to be called man and man in formal marriages (in certain states). They are accepted as civil unions but that doesn’t appear to be enough. Does he not allow disagreement based on biblical references (that marriage is a contract between one man and one woman)?
And what’s with the women’s rights that Republicans don’t advocate? From my perspective the only issues pertain to reproductive rights or preventions. Does he not allow disagreement based – once again – on religious principles (that contraceptives are a violation of Christian faith) and human rights? One must be naive not to understand that abortion is “cruel and inhuman punishment” because of its very nature. And late-term abortions are more than inhumane.
His statement that Republicans want to establish a national religion is ludicrous and has no basis in fact. We adhere to the First Amendment in that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Too many eggheads misinterpret that to mean eliminating any references to it by way of prayer or erecting a cross.
Never miss a local story.
He goes on to infer that we all should support unions. I was an ironworker for seven years and saw what went on internally. Much work and overtime jobs were handed out to the in crowd, prejudice existed against several ethnic groups – blacks especially – and production was purposely slowed down to increase time on the job to name a few. And look at today’s unions that have grown more political and are so corrupted that it’s despicable.
Let me end with the note with his claim that Republicans don’t support teachers. I remember Albert Shanker, the old head of AFT saying that the union was not there for the kids but for the teachers. Their own benefits were their prime objectives. I worked with the schools in Washington, D.C., for 10 years and found that it was almost impossible to rid schools of incompetent principals and teachers. But for the most part it’s competent and caring teachers who should be rewarded, not unions. Merit pay is one way to deal with this.
So, come off it, Mr. Plants. Your myopic view of what Republicans stand for is quite different than mine. And you can’t speak for Republicans.
The writer lives in Murrells Inlet.