Unfettered Letters

We, the people, lead our country

Marilyn Frenzel (3/29, Letters) writes that we need to remember the Bush administration and why we elected President Obama. She further states that Obama has surrounded himself with people smarter than the rest of us, and none of us are as qualified to lead as him.

Our Founding Fathers believed that God gave people fundamental rights and powers. The people elected leaders and lent them some of those powers. Leaders were to be constantly assessed for worthiness of their stewardship.

What needs to be remembered is why we became a nation to begin with and that we, the people are the leaders of our country. Our elected officials serve us, not the reverse. Constant vigilance is required of our nation’s citizens if personal freedoms are to be kept.

Patrick T. Vescovo
Kansas City

Wise words from long ago

Our forefathers were blessed with wisdom that is lacking today. A case in point in the quotation from Patrick Henry so many years ago:

“The Constitution is not an instrument for government to restrain the people. It is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interest.”

Wisdom of the long ago, but very apropos today. Certain truths last forever.

Don Airington
Kansas City

Constitution and our well-being

Alex McLellan (2/28, Letters, “Obama’s speech to Congress”) could not find the words “energy,” “health care,” or “education” in the Constitution of the United States. He implies that our government is therefore not empowered to deal with any of these areas.

Our Constitution was written “in order to form a more perfect union” (our government) empowered to “establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” — all words that are found in the preamble to our Constitution.

Every one of these constitutional aspirations would be extremely well served by health care that is both more affordable and more widely available, by higher quality education at all levels for all citizens, and by cleaner, safer and stable domestic energy sources, to name but a few of the cornerstones of our freedom and prosperity.

Perhaps actually reading the Constitution (as I will bet President Obama has) would serve our nation better than having a computer do a word search without context.

Kimbrough D. Warber
Kansas City, Kan.

Support for ERA in Kansas

Kansas is debating whether to add an Equal Rights Amendment to the Kansas Constitution (2/26, Local).

The opposition is trying to frame the debate by making the slippery-slope and fear arguments. They make the usual charges of abortion conspiracy, that it will invalidate rape laws, and that it would d be a pathway to gay marriage. Beyond the fact that these arguments are absurd, one must only look to the 22 states that have ERAs to know the claims are ridiculous.

Many states with ERAs have stricter abortion laws, and Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania courts have held that their ERAs do not allow for any change to abortion provisions existing in their states. The 22 ERA states all have laws against rape, and we already have an anti-gay marriage amendment.

When all fear and smear are debunked, the ERA is simply a collective constitutional commitment. It incorporates into the Constitution the prohibition of sex discrimination. While there are federal and state laws that address sex discrimination, it’s not the same as a constitutional commitment. Laws can be repealed and revoked at any time.

Support the ERA.

Marla Patrick
State Coordinator, Kansas National Organization for Women
Lindsborg, Kan.

Phelps’ funeral protests

I do not understand how Mike Burlingame (1/19, Letters, “Protecting free speech”) can compare the marchers for women’s rights and the freedom marchers of the ’60s to Fred Phelps. Mr. Phelps and his band of followers are putting up terrible signs at the funerals of fallen heroes.

I would like the American Civil Liberties Union to explain how the band of followers can infringe on the rights of the families to bury their loved ones.

As a Christian and a Vietnam veteran, I find the ACLU and Phelps quite disgusting.

John A. Smith
Kansas City

‘Free speech’ and the ACLU

I have a question for Mike Burlingame (1/19, Letters, “Protecting free speech”) who wrote in regard to Fred Phelps’ protests: “The ACLU is only ensuring that everyone gets their constitutional right of free speech.” If that is so, why are the Christian attorneys of Alliance Defense Fund and the Liberty Counsel having to fight all across the U.S. to protect free speech that the American Civil Liberties Union is trying to destroy?

Christian attorneys are winning the battle against the ACLU because the ACLU attorneys are using scare tactics to get public offices, schools, businesses and even homeowners organizations to get them to prevent Christians from using their right to free speech.

Are Christians the exception to the right to free speech? Not according to the many biographies I have read about our founding fathers who constructed the Constitution or influenced the writing of it.

Roland Sneed
Blue Springs

Protecting free speech

I agree with John Gaines (1/13, Letters) that Fred Phelps and his antics are disgusting. But Mr. Gaines seems to unfairly paint the American Civil Liberties Union with the same brush. The ACLU is only ensuring that everyone gets their Constitutional right of free speech.

Many Americans believe that controversial views should be subject to some sort of popularity contest. If this were true, African-Americans and women, for example, would never have gained their civil rights.

Mike Burlingame
Overland Park

Speaking English in America

There has been a healthy debate in Letters on freedom of speech and the requirement, or lack thereof, to learn and speak English in the U.S. over the last few weeks. The debate has been fueled by labor secretary appointee Hilda Solis’ decision to conduct part of her selection speech in Spanish.

Every American ought to read Theodore Roosevelt’s thoughts on “Americanization” from his later years. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag ... for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

What message would it send if Mexico’s labor secretary spoke to that country’s citizens in English?

Mike Curley
Leavenworth

Freedom of speech includes Spanish

Pam Hettinger (12/28, Letters) criticizes Hilda Solis, Barack Obama’s pick for labor secretary, for speaking Spanish, calling it un-American.

We are a free nation with freedom of speech, not just the freedom to speak English. Also, Ms. Hettinger somehow thinks English is a native language of the U.S.

Spanish and French were spoken here before English, and still neither of those are native languages.

Maybe Ms. Hettinger should research the word “Olathe” or “Kansas,” not to mention “Montana,” “Arizona,” “Colorado,” “Florida,” “rodeo,” “patio” and “tornado,” to name a few.

Malcolm Edwards
Kansas City

Second Amendment allows for self-defense

I am not a particularly heroic man. I honestly admit that if I or my loved ones were trapped in a burning building or attacked by armed criminals, I would much prefer that we be saved by the professionals — the fire department or the police, for example. But if the professionals cannot or will not save us, then I pledge that by God I will do what I can to save me and mine.

I believe that the founders of our great America, the brave men and women who struggled, suffered and died in that endeavor, shared my feelings when they wrote the Second Amendment for individuals into the U.S. Constitution.

In contrast, it appears that John R. Ratzlaff (12/3 Opinion, “As I See It: Right to bear arms focused on militias, not individuals”) and most liberals would prefer to perish as helpless victims if the professionals can’t save them.

Larry McMeins
Olathe