| Letters
to the editor from this week's Chronicle To the Editor How do we expect God to walk with us when we are continually walking away. The other day I was asked where is your God in all the suffering we see around us and what all loving God would act in this way. Tough question and one seemingly correct point. My response was simple, when will we start keeping and following his precepts, for God has not abandoned us we have abandoned God. We have set aside our responsibility to God and neighbor and abandoned these responsibilities to the state. We have made our halls of government our churches and the laws of men our precedent. The laws of nature were disrupted by man; at our creation we were given all we needed and we walked with God in the evening breeze and then we ruptured the relationship by deciding we could be like God; deceiving only ourselves but not God. So here we are today and at this point in history we are more removed from God than ever before. So I ask a question how are we doing? Do we like the world we have created in our image. Is it a world filled with love, compassion, charity; are we sharing our gifts and talents for the benefit of our fellow man. Lastly I reminded this person we will all die from this life and we came into this world with nothing and we will leave with nothing; so how do you want to be remembered? Our challenge before us is simple we return to our foundations and follow the laws of nature and nature’s God or we continue on the path we are on and I can predict what will happen and we will not like the outcome. Jim Chmelik Cottonwood To the Editor, Political Parties: Government or Private Corporate Clubs? Are elected officials sometimes more loyal to a political party than to those who elected them? If so, how does this happen? I wonder if it’s because political parties, like the Republican and Democratic Parties, are actually private corporate clubs. Later this spring, these private clubs will hold elections known as the “Primaries”. This is not a government activity. It’s a private club activity. I’ve often wondered why our tax dollars are used to support the elections of the ‘CEOs and board members’ of these private corporate clubs. Would it seem strange to give tax money to elect the CEO and board members of General Mills or Pepsi Corporation? Does it further seem strange that we allow private corporate clubs to choose our laws, our judges, and create regulations? If they represent the liberties of individuals who elected them, it’s not an issue per se. But if they are more loyal to their corporate club, to climb the corporate ladder, representative government is replaced by the ‘will’ of corporate clubs. Consider legislative leadership in Boise. Are legislators told how to vote according to the ‘will’ of the Republican or Democratic private corporate club? Or are legislators reminded to keep their oath of office to represent the people that elected them? Have too many elected officials fallen into the trap of representing a private corporate club for hopeful ‘corporate gains’ instead of representing us? Scott Perrin Cottonwood, Idaho To the Editor, The Slippery Road to There are two basic philosophies that distinguish true from false law. Do no harm: Nothing is so important that it justifies doing harm to others. If law is restricted to the purposes outlined in our Declaration of Independence, that is, protect Life, Liberty and Property, then it can do no harm because the force of law does not come into action unless true harm is being done. The Ends Justifies the Means: Men tend to think they are right and when they become convinced of a utopian idea that must be made reality, they usually fall into the trap of this mantra. Communism was born with this idea and even if it was originally conceived as a solution to our problems, “The Ends Justifies the Means” turns it into a generator of problems. The Communist manifesto uses this exact term and justifies all the evil their “progressive” actions cause. We see this all over today. Covid mandates, escalating wars, economic manipulation, interference with the family, educational indoctrination, and, of course, the almost universally accepted victimless crime laws which are burying us in rules and regulations that cause the average American to commit several felonies daily without realizing it. So why do we keep progressing down this line of thinking? More on that next time. Sanford Staab To the Editor, What Produces Literacy? If one can lead a horse to water but can’t make it drink, is it any less true that one can create a law to lead children to a classroom and make them learn? Lasting learning happens when students study of their own volition. They educate themselves because they are inspired. Since good teachers inspire, I want to know, “Are teacher’s abilities put first, or are rules, requirements, and structures of federal and state funding put first?” If so, do any of these rules, requirements, or structures impede teachers’ abilities to share their love of learning, their ingenuity to guide, their ability to ‘inspire rather than require’? Such teachers, if unencumbered by structure or rules, would think they died and went to heaven if they entered a classroom where children, due to parents, were rested, dressed, fed, felt loved, and were inspired to learn. Understanding this, I’ve often wondered why Legislators and parents are so quick to turn to the ‘law’ for literacy. Is the ‘stroke of the pen’ in and of itself the breast that fills itself with the milk of literacy? Students study when inspired. They will study hours. Until students are ‘inspired’ no amount of philanthropic donations, presidential mandates, creative legislation, or any amount of taxpayer money or creative programs will make a 9 year old youngster or an 18 year old learn. We as parents are part of this. The evidence is incontrovertible that children are inspired for or against literacy at home. When children see parents self-educating and sharing what they have learned, children often will self-educate. This is especially true if a parent and child study from the same book together. In my estimation, sometimes I wonder if we forget ‘inspiration’ is the best metric for literacy. Scott Perrin Cottonwood, Idaho Redneck Review! No. 359 - 3/13/22 Always wise to look at the other side of an argument, or even a claimed cause of one thing or another. A week or two ago, time was spent asking what were the major ingredients that were responsible for our U.S.A becoming the most envied nation on earth, compared to all those which had come before and had long periods to develop into the modern countries we are familiar with today. The claim was made here that our country's history clearly suggests a beginning based on the belief in a Creator God, and HIS God son Jesus, and the religion HE left us, Christianity, with a suggested life led in agreement with the Ten Commandments, and the Greatest one of all: "Love God and neighbor as oneself." That this is true is easily proved by a study of history and both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution adopted shortly after our nation's beginning. But it was also noted in those past articles, that a new theory is taking over our country, one that has established a sad history of earlier efforts to establish SOCIALISM by name based on the belief that mankind itself is the only entity responsible for everything associated with nation building. The record history paints of this woeful effort is very clear, and is there for anyone who really wants to know what the final results of such efforts are. Sad, dismal, starvation, and then death for large portions of the people involved who choose not to go along with the founders. Arguments to the contrary are in vain, as history tells repeatedly the sad tale! So follow along below for an analysis of basic positions found in most of the advocates of the system of SOCIALISM which is the political tool used by those in history who are characterized by the following beliefs or convictions: 1)Atheism, or maybe just secularism. Either no belief in a loving and creator God, or at least a conviction that no such entity is really concerned with we who inhabit the earth. True, many claim otherwise, but then calmly ignore and even condemn those who attempt to follow the few rules laid down by that superior! Case in point are those who claim affiliation with a Christian religion, then calmly advocate or at least defend the current "politically correct" support of abortion. Ridiculous! How can one blithely support or tolerate the practice of snuffing out the life of the most innocent among us, then calmly claim it is not a violation of "Thou shalt not kill!" 2)A second characteristic of most of the supporters of this new but bankrupt system, is that mankind is really the only one in charge of life on this earth, and how it is to be set up and lived. Critical decisions on big issues are made by experts in government and banking, and thus must be obeyed by we the common folk who are promised equal living conditions and literally a "utopia on earth." 3)Finally, instead of we the people needing to live by a code of conduct taught by a religion as advocated above, we individually have the right to decide what is right or wrong based on our own judgment and conscience. This last is really the essence of this last philosophy, only conceding that on big issues, experts will be relied on to supply the details. One of two personal experiences mentioned follow! Another next week! First, a former student back to visit me years after graduation, maintained that he did not give religion the right to decide for him what was right or wrong. After hours of discussion about the need for an outside law giver vs. each person deciding for himself, he admitted to me, "Yes, if using his claim, YOU could decide that I was such a threat to your children and your beliefs, that you could in good conscience, pick a big knife off the wall, and slice me into two parts! If you honestly thought I and my claim was such a threat to your family and your country! Case closed! Jake Wren
|
|