Letters-May 27, 2004

Harrison letter

kept as reminder
To the editor:
   I have just finished reading Ms. Harrison’s letter to the editor in The Beacon of May 13.
   It was a well-written letter. But then I’m sure Ms. Harrison has written many letters like this one.
   I am saving this letter. I will use this letter to always remind myself that no matter how far I or my friends think our community has been accepted or progressed, we must always be aware that people like Ms. Harrison exist.
   It will also remind me that there is a group of people who, while being learned and erudite and patriotic, still think that the first sentence in the second paragraph of The Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," only apply to the privileged few.
   That the lives that have been given for our country and contributed to our nation’s development have always been those of heterosexuals.
   That only the best children come from homes with a mother and father.
   That the child who is from a different type of home should be ashamed and shunned.
   That same-sex commitments are wrong but divorce is not.
   That what I or Ms. Harrison do in the privacy of our own bedrooms with people we love must follow strict protocol.
   That the burden of tax cuts that favor the wealthy and war is acceptable, but that a person who has worked all their lives and contributed to social security should not be allowed to designate the small increase inherent in survivor social security to a loved one.
   This letter will remind me that Christian and liberty are not labels that a church or nation can bestow, but are beliefs born in the soul, Ms. Harrison.

Many helped

with Field Day
To the editor:
   Our West Amwell School Field Day was once again a huge success.
   As co-chairwoman of this event, I would like to thank all of you who made it possible.
   Many thanks go to our wonderful staff and my co-chairwoman, Mrs. Cirullo. She puts so much time and energy into this day, and it really pays off when you see our children having such a great time.
   To the parents who come out every year full of energy and ready to work, I am so grateful for you. I honestly believe that we have the nicest families on this planet right here in West Amwell. It is a joy to work along side of you.
   To the PTO, whose continued support of field day has kept it going strong year after year.
   I would also like to thank our local merchants for their donations. Delray, who donated the butter and cream cheese for our bagels and Giant, who generously donated a $50 gift card.
   Lastly, a big thank you goes to Mr. Colalillo of ShopRite in Flemington. Once again they donated all of the hot dogs, hamburgers, salads, watermelons and more. Once again I was greeted with his kind, eager and very professional staff, and once again I felt like the most valuable customer in their store.
   When I read his response letter to me, I couldn’t help but notice the store’s values listed on the letterhead: Integrity, self-realization, family, service and enjoyment. They very obviously take their values seriously because every employee in that store is a living example of them.
   Mr. Colalillo, you are a wonderful inspiration to your staff and to all of us, and I love shopping at ShopRite.

Carr’s intentions

best for district
To the editor:
   I recently read a letter written to you by Lisa Lynch as did several in our small community of New Hope-Solebury.
   It’s unfortunate she was so insulted by the manner in which Mr. Carr conducted the New Hope Solebury School board meetings, which she attended.
   I, too, attended the meetings. I felt he was a bit short with all of the parents who wanted to address the subject.
   I recall the initial meeting of budget cuts in the beginning of April in which many parents attended. At the commencement of the meeting, he indicated only subjects on the agenda would be addressed.
   Unfortunately, many did not wish to respect that. They addressed subjects, which he clearly indicated were not on the agenda. Several times he indicated to all members in the audience, he was not going to hear matters that were not on the agenda.
   It’s unfortunate that she feels she was singled out by his stern comments, but he spoke to every person in the same fashion.
   While I was not at the meeting in which Ms. Lynch tried to express her support for the superintendent, it is exactly the same practice he has followed in the past. She indicates she’s a minority representing a small portion of the community. I believe we, as a community, represent each other. We are a community.
   The way Mr. Carr conducts a meeting has nothing to do with discrimination of an individual; it has to do with respect of the protocol.
   At the board meeting this past Monday (May 17), Mr. Carr resigned from the school board, which is unfortunate for the entire district. This letter portrayed him as someone he is not. He is a very active member of the community, volunteering numerous hours in varying activities, from sports to school.
   I have never met Mr. Carr personally, but have seen him at many functions. His best intentions for the community have always been apparent.

Morality should be

majority rule
To the editor:
   I recently had a discussion with a young woman about the judicial system in our country.
   She actually accused me of being a Communist because I suggested that our judicial system had some problems that needed addressing.
   When I said that from the Supreme Court on down the courts had arrogated too much power to themselves, she retorted with the following: "Well, these are not just any people who serve on this court. Who do you want making decisions for us? Certainly you don’t want to leave decisions like this up to the people, the ignorant masses! If you leave moral decisions up to the people, then morality is just a numbers game."
   Before I could answer, she went on, "There are checks and balances in this country, and that’s what the Supreme Court is for: to check laws that a certain group is trying to pass because you think you represent everyone’s morality. But you don’t."
   Her argument, from first to last, is a mass of confusion and contradictions, and I’m afraid that a lot of people hold these kind of contradictory views. After first accusing me of being a Communist simply because I thought our system was in need of reform, it was she who expressed truly communistic views. It is Communists, or totalitarians of any breed, who place no faith in the people. It is Communists, socialists, fascists and statists of every ideology who believe an elite group should enact laws and hold this kind of power over the people.
   It is precisely faith in the people that makes us a democracy. Yes, I do think the American people, when presented with facts and issues, can make rational choices and should be the ones, ultimately, deciding on the laws of our land.
   The next part of her argument, that a minority of moralists must be prevented from seeking to impose its morality on majority, actually contradicts her first statement that morality is too important to leave up to the masses. If morality is not to be determined by majority rule, because that’s playing the "numbers game," then why should the majority require protection from the minority?
   Now she’s back to having the majority rule; those very people that she considered too ignorant to be capable of making important decisions in the first place. So which is it: does the court protect us from the majority or the minority?
   I’m writing this letter not to "get back" at a person with whom I had a very brief discussion. I don’t even know her, and I’m sure she won’t see this or ever see me again. We don’t even know each other’s names.
   I’m writing it because I think she expresses some commonly accepted views that need addressing. A great many people have a very confused notion of how our laws should be made and of how morality is arrived at. What she was really touching on, but didn’t know it, is that morality is indeed something outside the realm of majority or minority rule. It is something that must come from a greater source, something outside us, outside majority decision or minority rule or cultural debate or our likes or dislikes or feelings, etc.
   Morality must have a foundation: that is the key. Until very recently, the people of our country knew that our moral base arose from a Judeo-Christian ethic, and they had little or no problem with that. Immigrants to our country knew this about us before coming here, and that was one of the attractions.
   Our laws did not hamper people outside these faiths. The laws passed based on this ethic had universal appeal and relevance; every culture admitted that stealing, murder and adultery were wrong.
   Lately, primarily due to the liberal leanings of our universities and courts, people have been taught to be suspect of our moral heritage. The problem is that they leave themselves in a relativistic quagmire. Having lost sight of just what that foundation should be, they are willing to hand over the decision-making power to the courts of our land and let them derive our morality for us.
   A great many people have come to see the Supreme Court as nine demigods who somehow have access to greater morality than anyone else and who, therefore, must be permitted to veto, create and rewrite the laws of our land.
   This was never the intended purpose of the Supreme Court. Its original purpose was merely to function as the final court of appeal, but from almost the beginning, the court decided it was within its purview to review laws and decide on their constitutionality, and so that has become its accepted purpose as established by precedence.
   But it was never intended for the courts, not even the Supreme Court, to create or veto laws based on their morality. It is up to the Legislature to write and pass the laws, and the Legislature enacts laws based on the will of the people.
   It is not the people of our country who cannot be trusted. It is the elite group of judges who think that they and they alone can act as our moral arbiters. Today’s courts are intent on removing God and traditional morality from the public forum, and this was certainly never the intention of the founding fathers in the establishment of the Constitution or the Judiciary.
   As John Adams, among others of the founding fathers, so aptly pointed out, when a country loses its moral bearings and foundation, it will not remain a republic for long. When we no longer know from where our morality arises, when we can no longer agree as a people on the basics of right and wrong, then people become more and more willing to hand power to an elite group to make these decisions for us. That, by the way, is the beginning of totalitarianism.
   In case after case, the courts of our land are thwarting the will and accepted wisdom of the people in favor of liberal leanings. They are the ones changing our moral basis — a few self-appointed moral policeman — far fewer in number than the supposed "moral minority."
   For those concerned about minority rule, here is the epitome of that rule. The Supreme Court has struck down the right even to hang the Ten Commandments in a courtroom or any public room — a codified set of laws that all western civilization has agreed upon for centuries.
   Where are these nine people now getting their morality from, and why should we trust them to set the agenda for our nation?
   Thank you, but until judges can show me how they are mystically achieving a greater understanding of morality than I gain through believing in the Bible, I’ll thank them to stick to their job that of resolving disputes based on laws already established and deciding on the constitutionality of the laws based on the Constitution.
   And I’m quite sure there’s nothing in the Constitution that says we must allow doctors to take a baby in the process of being born and plunge a pair of scissors into its brain, or that it would be wrong to look to the Ten Commandments when deciding on issues of right or wrong, or that homosexuals must be allowed to marry one another, or any of a myriad of other things the courts deem it their right to decide upon.
   Indeed, when judges begin making such decisions and carrying their power to these extremes, it is time for the people to impeach them. Impeachment of judges is provided for in the Constitution, for judges too must be responsible, ultimately, to the people.

Habitats being

destroyed in city
To the editor:
   On returning to Lambertville after living in Manhattan and Los Angeles for the past 20 years, I was struck by the unyielding small-town values.
   The neighborhood involvement in this community is outstanding: residents volunteer for emergency services, raise funds for local causes and advocate for the town’s interests at city meetings. How admirable to have a historical society oversee and preserve the beauty of our business district and the unwavering support for the service men and woman from our community, who fight to defend our home!
   Yet, I find jarringly disturbing the total lack of respect for our natural heritage. Builders are readily granted subdivision rights on lands that provide habitat for threatened wildlife. Animal and plant species that have been here for hundreds of years are being lost as their habitats are clear-cut and completely wiped out in minutes. To wit, the blue-winged warbler — a beautiful little songbird and one on the National Watch List — will soon be deprived of its Lambertville home at the end of Perry Road. The National Watch List tracks species at possible risk for extinction.
   Although several pressing issues regarding this shaky development (e.g., water supply, stormwater runoff and sewer) have yet to be settled, this land was granted a subdivision against the city engineers’ recommendation. Yet, the critical nature of this land as habitat has never seriously been considered.
   The director of bird conservation for the National Audubon Society in Washington, D.C., had visited the property last spring and sent a letter to the city explaining the importance of this habitat for the blue-winged warbler as well as the eastern bluebird, a species of conservation concern in New Jersey.
   Earth Day, when many towns across the nation celebrated their connection to nature — and before the builder had received final approval — half the hedgerow where blue-winged warblers nest was mowed down, taking with it all the wildlife contained within.
   I’m sickened by this purposeful destruction; so much for upholding the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in Lambertville.
   Men and woman give their lives for our country every day, and here in our lovely hometown the land we fight for is being plowed under and paved over without the slightest regard for our natural history, quality of life, or respect for our community.

Man gives thanks

to former chief
To the editor:
   I was just glancing at some of the top stories today and ran across a piece about a veteran police chief that was retiring after his 66 years of service to the community, and I came away quite impressed.
   This man, former police chief Frank P. Masterson Jr. is seemingly a patriarch of the law enforcement community, taking all sorts of initiative in terms of drug awareness and drug prevention, not to mention dealing with every other sort of everyday workload he had as a chief. I personally can say I’ve been drug-free my entire life and will stay that way. I don’t have any sort of interest in those kinds of activities.
   And while I can’t attribute my lack of interest in drugs to our community’s drug prevention activities, I can certainly say they helped me and kept me informed as to the dangers of narcotics.
   So I would just like to recognize this man for all of his achievements in making our local communities a safer place and trying to rid the area of the consequences of having a drug-induced society.

New exhibit had

lots of help
To the editor:
   A new exhibit called "Lambertville Roots: Evolution of a River Town" is now on display at the Marshall House on Bridge Street.
   The exhibit was opened with a celebration on the evening of May 7. The doors to the Marshall House were opened and the new Oriental rug unfurled to welcome the 70 some guests.
   After viewing the exhibit, the guests were invited across the street to the First Baptist Church for wine, appetizers and slide shows of old Lambertville images in a festive atmosphere of bunting, silk flowers and candlelight.
   Many people worked many hours to make this exhibit and its opening such a success. Bill Dorman, past president of the Lambertville Historical Society, first formulated the idea of developing a new exhibit that would give an overview of Lambertville’s history. He is also the one who wrote up the two grant applications that were awarded by the New Jersey Historic Commission and the Hunterdon County Cultural and Heritage Commission.
   With money in hand, LHS hired the firm of Past Perspectives. Its president, Dorothy Hartman, used our general ideas and the archive resources available to develop a coherent storyline. While she was doing this, we put a call out to the community for additional photos and archives to augment those within the LHS collection. Numerous businesses and individuals loaned us items for the duration of the exhibit that greatly enhance it.
   Also during this time, a group headed by Ron Todd and including Bill Dorman, Polly Dorman, Karen Todd and Kate Breuning put in many hours patching and painting the walls in the foyer, stairway and exhibit room of the Marshall House in preparation for the new exhibit. The actual display of the exhibit was designed and installed by Yvonne Skaggs of Past Perspectives with the help of LHS staff. Initially she was helped by Nancy Keim-Comley and Mary Helen Hughes and finally by Tammy Barnes.
   Tammy not only helped with the upstairs exhibit but she also put up all of the exhibits in the foyer with some construction assistance from Mike Rafail.
   LHS would also like to thank Niece’s Lumber for the generous contribution of building supplies for the exhibit.
   The opening celebration was organized by a committee of LHS trustees, Kate Breuning, Mary Freedman, Mila Montemayor, Karen Todd and Norm Weiner. I extend many thanks to ShopRite for the donation of the wine for the exhibit opening.
   The success of the opening was enhanced by the help of the Lambertville Police Department who provided us with a crossing guard and most particularly by your generous publicity.
   Besides all of these people, I would like to thank all of the attendees for coming and celebrating our exhibit opening with us. Most importantly, I’d like to thank all of the members of the Lambertville Historical Society because it was their dues and donations that allowed us to match the grants and make this new exhibit a reality.
   The exhibit, "Lambertville Roots: Evolution of a River Town," can be viewed weekends from 1 to 4 p.m. at the Marshall House. Please come and enjoy.
   Very many thanks to all of those listed above and any I may have forgotten who made this exhibit and opening celebration possible.

Thanks for

auction donations
To the editor:
   The South Hunterdon Regional High School Marching Band and Band Parents Association would like to thank all the merchants, civic organizations and individuals who donated to our recent Chinese auction.
   Your generosity made this event a successful fund-raiser for the band. Money raised at the auction will help defray the cost of equipment, uniforms, band camp and festivals.
   Again, please accept our sincere thanks for your continued support each year.