published Monday, November 1st, 2010

Letters to the Editor

Make government more efficient

Recently I read an article in which the writer touts there's something else to cherish about health reform: Standards that require insurance companies to spend 85 percent of their income on customers' medical care instead of lavish overhead, such as executives' super-sized salaries and stock options. Assuming an insurance company made $773 million, then it would be expected to administer its business with $115.9 million.

In another news article (Feds pay $773 million to detoxify old GM sites), the Obama administration has reached a deal on a $773 million environmental trust to clean up dozens of former GM sites. The plan includes $431 million for states to clean up former GM properties and $262 million for administrative costs. That comes to more than 50 percent for administrative costs, as much as they will spend on the project. With the mega national debt, wouldn't you think our government should be as efficient as they demand the insurance companies to be? Is our government a joke or what! Do they really think the American people are so naive?

TAYLOR CAVIN

Hixson



What do we do to regain control?

The regain control of government letter (Oct. 27) is a breath of fresh air compared with most of the other letters you print concerning this issue. This writer carefully and concisely gave solutions to several of our problems with a hint of explanation following each one. The one thing he did not tell us is exactly how we can go about getting control again. Voting the bums out hasn't been the answer, as we just wind up with another set of crooks. I wonder if the new tea party is a step in the right direction. While we are at it, let's hoist the Constitution!

NELLE CLEGHORN

Trion, Ga.



Private sector should step up

The opponents of Obama are trying to convince the voters that his plans for stabilizing the effects of this 2007 recession are completely wrong. The total national debt already was at $12 trillion in 2007. The total national debt didn't cause the 2007 deep recession, but it is necessary for the good of this republic to spend money in preventing the effects of the recession from causing a "great depression."

Not all of the crisis conditions we are in happened at the time President Obama took office, but the anti-Obama people would like the voters to believe that Obama caused them.

At this time, the criticism we hear is "government spending is out of control and where are all of the jobs that President Obama promised after his spending?" I ask, where are the private enterprise sectors who should be stepping up, creating jobs here, without being subsidized? While at the same time, what are the U.S. consumers doing to help create manufacturing jobs here, while continuing to have a $50 billion trade deficit per month with the global corporate monopolies?

Carl Brackin

Georgetown, Tenn.



City's response to storm excellent

As one whose neighborhood was in the path of Tuesday's tornado, I would like to offer sincere thanks to the Department of Public Works and the Electric Power Board, who were on the scene almost immediately after the storm hit and worked nearly 24 hours straight to get fallen trees cleared and power restored to our area. We could not have asked for a quicker or more efficient response from the city.

Allison Gorman

Hixson



Preacher's message was for change

Is he a friend of yours?

He was an itinerant street preacher. He lived among the homeless, the poor and the social outcasts.

He called the religious right serpents, hypocrites, and children of Satan. Calling them "a den of thieves," he went into their church and turned over the furniture.

He said the rich could hardly be saved and told them to sell what they had and give it to the poor.

The conservatives called him a heretic: They arrested, convicted and executed him as a traitor.

He preached love, humility, generosity and compassion for the less fortunate.

Today's right-wing conservatives would call him a liberal and a socialist.

His message was for change: Change of heart, of lifestyle, of mind. Conservative means "against change."

You can find his biography in the first four books of the New Testament. His name is Jesus.

EDNA TAYLOR



Hixson team shows fine sportsmanship

I recently had the opportunity to witness an awesome display of sportsmanship. I attended the opening round of the TSSAA volleyball tournament in Nashville to cheer for the Soddy-Daisy Lady Trojans. Sadly, not one student from Soddy-Daisy was there to support their hard-working girls who had come so far to bring honor to their school. However, Coach Janet Tate from Hixson High School had brought her entire volleyball team to cheer for Soddy-Daisy.

How awesome is this! It just proves that on the floor they can be very competitive, but off the floor, the level of sportsmanship rises to new heights. My hat is off to the Hixson High volleyball team and their coach. Thanks for your support. To Coach Johnson and the Lady Trojans, thanks for a great season: You fought hard and should be so proud of your accomplishment.

PHYLLIS MCCOY



Separation meant to prevent strife

It will make no difference to the local religious fundamentalists who so savor the imaginary frisson of being oppressed (in Chattanooga? puh-lease), but in the spirit of optimism I offer this quote from James Madison, one of the Founding Fathers of this great country: "The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries."

Donald W.

McArthur



Social Security policy set in 1975

In response to an Oct. 24 letter, my husband is also a Social Security recipient, and I have been unemployed for 18 months, so we feel your pain. However, no matter how much one may dislike the present administration, they have nothing to do with the lack of a cost-of-living adjustment the past two years. The COLA has been tied to the rate of inflation since 1975, and the sitting administration cannot override it, whether they be Republican or Democrat. At least, last year, we were not hit with a raise in our Medicare premiums as usually happens during a COLA year. We haven't heard if they will be able to do that for us again this year. We are a nation that likes to assess blame as long as it doesn't fall on us.

Brenda Resh



Use lunch or break for personal things

In response to an Oct. 27 letter to the editor, I agree that the majority of employees do personal business while on company time, (ie. checking cell phones, texting, Facebook, Twitter, e-mails and personal calls). Does this make it right? Absolutely not!

This is an ethical matter which reflects your true character. The time you put in at your place of employment is not yours to do your personal business! You have an employer who hired you to work for him/her. It is your personal responsibility to give 100 percent of your time and efforts to the job and position for which you were hired! If you need to attend to personal matters, do so on your break or lunch time, not at the expense of your employer.

DEBBIE DARLING

22
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
Francis said...

yes, taylor...they do think we're that naive.

and mr. mcarthur.....there's also the imaginary persecution athiests insist they're subjected to by those who display their faith in a free country.

there's no mention of seperation of church and state in the constitution...it simply says the government shall not establish a religion and it cannot stand in the way of anyone worshipping as they see fit.....

that also guarantees that athiests can be athiests..but it doesn't say anything about never mentioning god or not praying if one chooses to in a public place. don't pray or pray..up to you....believe or don't believe..up to you. no one is forcing anyone to convert....in iran maybe..but not here..

madison's comments pertain to organized religion and all the problems that stem from that. aknowledging a creator does not constitute an organized religion.

there's nothing in the constituion about freedom from religion. if you're offended by people gathering and praying, then you live in the wrong place.

November 1, 2010 at 1:22 a.m.
bookworm said...

To Francis: Francis, you miss the point entirely. The operative phrase is "the government shall establish no religion." That means if there is organized prayer at a government tax payer supported public school that that is a tacit government endorsement of a particular religion. Further, I don't think there is anything in the Bible that mandates that one should flaunt one's faith as a means of public display. Religion is a personal thing between the individual and one's god.

November 1, 2010 at 2:25 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Yes, bookworm, I've posted Jesus' teachings about prayer, but the hypocrites keep denying their own Jesus -- Judases, all. These fake Xtians are so concerned with impressing humans, they turn their back on the teachings of the bible. My bible has Jesus' words printed in red -- the printers try to make it easy, even for the mentally impaired, to see how Jesus suggests (in fact it's more of an ORDER) his followers live. They're such wailing, whining, hypocrites -- they obviously don't believe the hogwash they want others to live by, but not THEM. I guess since they've boarded up all the churches, they have to take to football games and various and sundry other public events to pray (show their hypocrisy), lol.

November 1, 2010 at 6:04 a.m.
rolando said...

You have yet to provide anything from YOUR sources, annie. What's the matter, none there so you quote ours?

Thanks for proselytizing, though. [hilarious]

November 1, 2010 at 7:04 a.m.
anniebelle said...

You are really stupid aren't you, rolando? We're talking about YOUR book -- I don't have any fairy tale books that I consult.

November 1, 2010 at 7:12 a.m.
rolando said...

You are picking and choosing, bookworm.

The "operative phrase" in its entirety is, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."

It says nothing whatsoever about "no religion" as you claim. Your overly broad interpretation [and that of the SCOTUS] has no bearing or relationship with the original wording.

There is simply no such thing as an original intent to exclude religion for our government -- the SCOTUS opens every session with a mention of it...it even has religious icons scattered everywhere in its court building. Icons with other figures paying them homage.

November 1, 2010 at 7:15 a.m.
anniebelle said...

btw, rolando, you wouldn't be interested in any of my reading material, it all comes from the non-fiction section of the book store.

November 1, 2010 at 7:17 a.m.
eeeeeek said...

Every Naturalized Citizen has had to take Naturalization Test.

Under the Civics (History and Government) for the Naturalization Test

Question 10 under section A: Principles of American Democracy

  1. What is freedom of religion?
  2. You can practice any religion, or not practice a religion.

I learned this in my US History class as well. Surprising for this area, I know, but it was the 70's.

It is so sad that the natural born citizens don't have to learn and remember anything, in comparison to a citizen who came here for the American dream.

November 1, 2010 at 7:34 a.m.
eeeeeek said...

"No links for you" says the link nazi that doesn't like source links.

re: (This comment was removed by the site staff.)

November 1, 2010 at 8:37 a.m.
Francis said...

that's right bookworm...establish no religion...and?

"flaunt".....i guess building a new, shiney church is kind of like flaunting... it's built to promote that faith and to be seen...it can be viewed by the public, even though it's on private property...

having people pray in public in whatever manner suits them is not flaunting a particular religion....public displays of prayer are private even t hough they're in public.

November 1, 2010 at 11:59 a.m.
TravelinThru said...

"having people pray in public in whatever manner suits them is not flaunting a particular religion....public displays of prayer are private even t hough they're in public."

Francis, that made absolutely no sense whatsoever. Just sayin'

November 1, 2010 at 12:35 p.m.
Leaf said...

So Francis, you'd be OK with a prayer at a football game where a bunch of people get out their prayer rugs and face toward Mecca?

What if before every game an atheist got on the loudspeaker and said, "God doesn't exist, and when you die, that's it. Hope nobody dies at the game."

How would that go over in Chattanooga, do you think?

November 1, 2010 at 1:55 p.m.
realityrox said...

How would it go in Chattanooga?

Probably the same way it happened in Cobb county Georgia when Smyrna atheist Ed Buckner lead the invocation for the Cobb County Board of Commissioners meeting.

http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/atheist-gives-invocation-at-103965.html

November 1, 2010 at 2:18 p.m.
ITguy said...

Francis, and Rolando, the issue has been decided by the freaking Supreme Court of the United States. It is a violation of the first amendment to have an invocation before a high school football game. This issue has been decided. It is a done deal. It is over. Get the frock over it and move on. Kind of like whe the Supreme Court gave GWB the presidency.

November 1, 2010 at 7:54 p.m.
ITguy said...

I don't normally agree with Edna Taylor, but today she is 100% right on.

November 1, 2010 at 7:56 p.m.
ITguy said...

Kind of like WHEN the Supreme Court...

This iPad keyboard...

November 1, 2010 at 8:01 p.m.
Livn4life said...

You know all the bickering and banter on here back and forth illustrates what we were trying to avoid when this nation was established. The division being caused politically, religiously, racially is tearing at the heart of this once proud and graceful nation. Government being involved where it really does not belong(ie taking over schools, how is that working out?)has made matters worse. Everyone seems to want to stand up for his or her rights and those only. I am one who is tired of it on these posts, in our streets in our schools and even in homes these days. For heaven's sakes, if you do not adhere to something do not bring your biased opinions on it. If you are not a Christian, you know not what it is about nor the one whom it represents. If you are a Christian, act like one be like Christ, do not judge even those who use the words of the Bible against you. If some choose to dispute and call the words of the Bible fairy tales, that is their American right. Yet if it is true they face what possible consequences may lie ahead. They do not emanate from any who truly follow Jesus. No one group's rights are to be held above another's. But with our current system, they are. With government impingement into the private sector when it chooses, some who only wish to be religious in their own sense and try to accept those otherwise get trampled because of all the public nonsense many well meaning but overbearing persons bring. Why not try a little kindness from both sides? See how that might work out better in days ahead. Is that unreasonable?

November 1, 2010 at 10:05 p.m.
SavartiTN said...

Everyone is born an atheist, Francis.

BTW, I believe that the absolute most worthless words spoken by mankind are "I'll pray for you."

November 1, 2010 at 11:01 p.m.
acerigger said...

Livn, if there were no differing opinions around here,then how could you possibly find out that everyone is not like you?

November 1, 2010 at 11:05 p.m.
anniebelle said...

The answer is they don't want to hear other people's opinions, because they have their heads planted firmly up their nether-regions, which renders them unable to think rationally or see anyone else's point of view. Ignorance abounds in this country and boy are they proud of it -- just look at the woefully pitiful group of mindnumbing brainless candidates in the GOP. Their constituents like them because they are ignorant like them, so it legitimizes their ignorance.

November 2, 2010 at 7 a.m.
jimcarwest said...

SavartiTN

No, everyone is born a sinner, by nature a rebel. That's why there are atheists. A child does not have to be taught to do wrong; it's his nature. He has to be taught to recognize His Maker, to love others, to do right.

November 2, 2010 at 8:09 a.m.
SavartiTN said...

jimcarwest, we are all born free of guilt and sin. Sin is a man made manifestation and was the focus of Calvinism. How can a child possibly be born a sinner? And I disagree that it is a child's nature to do wrong. Morality is human nature. The Bible does not hold the patent on morality.

But since you think that you are stating Bible principles, I believe that you should read it thoroughly and look for that children born sinners thing. You are not going to find it in the context that you are using it.

The reason that everyone is born an atheist is because they are born without knowing or believing in a god or gods. That makes them godless. But not sinners.

It is statements such as yours that keep me from being a Christian.

November 2, 2010 at 12:15 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.