• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
39°
Wednesday October 22, 2014
View complete forecast
News-Sentinel.com Your Town. Your Voice.
Local Business Search
Stock Summary
Dow16461.32-153.49
Nasdaq4382.85-36.63
S&P 5001927.11-14.17
AEP55.920.36
Comcast51.49-0.7
GE25.19-0.26
ITT Exelis16.44-0.03
LNC49.16-0.61
Navistar33.06-0.74
Raytheon97.45-0.66
SDI22.260.36
Verizon48.31-0.38

Letters to the editor

Thursday, January 31, 2013 - 12:01 am

Statue solution

There are concerns from the National Historic Landmark people about moving a statue to the Courthouse Green. I and others suggested they move Little Turtle’s as well as Gen. Wayne’s there. Perhaps there can be a compromise, one to preserve the NHL status of the Courthouse Green and display both men with honor.

There is a new Martin Luther King Bridge on Clinton, the east and west sides of Clinton, south of the bridge are Headwaters Park. Perhaps somewhere between the bridge and Superior Street we could place Little Turtle to the east and Wayne to the west near the street. This would seem to solve the concerns of all involved in this debate, except those who complain about the cost.

To them I say, that money would provide income to local workers who will pay taxes on that income and in turn return some of that money to the local coffers. They will also spend some of that money on consumer goods, which will benefit the local economy.

But my life experience has shown logic and common sense rarely prevail. Too many times ignorance, prejudice and greed win the day, so my words here will most likely be in vain. If they like my idea there will be an argument about which statue sits on which side or even if both are displayed. Both should be, and my logic as to which side each one sits is chronological. We read from left to right, Little Turtle was here first, plain and simple.

I hope my words here do not fall on deaf ears, that someone, somewhere will see the logic and reasoning to my solution to the debate. I am not a prophet, but I predict very few will pay attention. I just hope those that can implement my solution will.

Michael J. Ward

Unborn's civil rights

Like most Americans, I can applaud Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s tireless effort to knock down walls of injustice. I have heard his famous speech many times, listened to his interviews and read about him. Several years ago, I heard his niece Alveda King speak at the annual Allen County Right to Life march.

Alveda gave a passionate speech about civil rights, briefly describing her dad’s and her uncle’s work to remove prejudice from the law and from peoples’ hearts. She is one of my favorite speakers Right to Life has had.

So, when I listened to her and looked around the audience, it shocked me that there was then and still was this year, virtually no representation from those who Martin Luther King Jr. fought for first and foremost. As Alveda described several years ago, life, at all stages, is precious, and abortion is a civil rights issue.

Who will speak for the unborn? Who will march on their behalf? I do. Many do. Where are the non-Caucasians, though? This civil rights fight involves all races and creeds. God who has granted life has not partitioned us. Man has done that. God has also impassioned men and women to work to unite people.

When President Obama suggests we should do whatever we can to protect against another Newtown massacre even if it only saves one life, he is limiting what he can do. He could work tirelessly to end funding for abortion. He could use his pulpit to help change attitudes and work to overturn Roe v. Wade. He could educate people that a child’s unique DNA is proof that in the womb is not a mass of a mother’s cells that can simply be destroyed but a unique individual. He could save millions. He could, but he won’t. I challenge those who truly care about civil rights for all not to forget the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Be more willing to save lives than the president. This is not asking much.

Tim Sorg