Spirit of freedom
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Friday, Nov. 16, 2012, 8:56 p.m.
Spirit of freedom
The recent controversy over the stated purpose of a stone monument has brought the national debate over the separation of church and state to our quaint community.
The Fraternal Order of Eagles donated the Ten Commandments monument to help eliminate juvenile crime during the 1940s and '50s. The messages in commandments five through 10 meet this requirement. These messages are needed now more than ever to help guide our youth through our confusing and fragmented culture.
Since the monument is located on school property, it gives some the idea that the school district is promoting a religion. What if the monument were not on school grounds? Would the plaintiffs still have a case?
The district should sell the parcel of land back to the F.O.E. or donate the land, thus taking the monument off district property. This would defeat the argument that the school district is choosing one religion over another.
We think this compromise respects the wishes of both parties. Connellsville Area School District needs to remind everyone our country was built on the spirits of freedom and cooperation and this solution will demonstrate that to our community.
Brett C. Baumgartel
The writer is a career transition instructor for Private Industry Council, Uniontown. The letter was submitted on behalf of the entire Connellsville Carnegie Free Library Career Transitions/GED class.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Prison plan & the public’s say
- Shredded Wheat & ‘Low T’
- Funding priorities questioned
- Ukraine & history
- Proven success
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- What competition?
- Metcalfe wrong
- Lebo’s coyotes
- We pay to keep poor warm
- Conspicuous by absence