Church issues statement on border separations
In response to the humanitarian crisis at our nation’s southern border, the Session of First Presbyterian Church of San Anselmo has issued a statement. The complete statement is at our website, togetherweserve.org/pastor-s-blog, but we wish to share excerpts:
Recently, the administration began separating families and criminally prosecuting all people who enter the U.S. without previous authorization, removing children, including many as young as 2 or 3 years old, to detention facilities away from their parents. We vehemently condemn this cruel practice as an outrage and a travesty. The harm done to these children is permanent and has a lifetime of health consequences. We further condemn the use of cruelty as a potential bargaining chip to achieve increasingly draconian immigration policies.
Finally, we condemn the misappropriation of Scripture to justify this loveless action. It is disgraceful for a government official to use Scripture in order to say, “obey me.” If this situation is to be approached from a Christian perspective, or relying on Christian teachings, the Bible honors the stories of migrants looking for new homes, and condemns ripping children out of the hands of their parents. These families are the very neighbors Jesus commands us to love.
In fact, Jesus says that there is nothing more imperative than loving. Separating children from parents is not loving in any way, but instead, is an evil practice which must end with all families reunited, safe and free.
— Joanne Whitt, pastor and head of staff, First Presbyterian Church, San Anselmo
‘I weep for my country’ as GOP defends Trump
When President Obama bowed to the Japanese emperor, Republicans in mass called it “treasonous.”
Yet, when President Trump salutes a North Korean Communist general they say nothing, they do nothing. They blindly accept the salute.
When Trump decides to abandon the yearly military exercises with South Korea because Kim Jong Un asks for it, Republicans say nothing. Republicans do nothing. Trump did not confer with the president of South Korea, he did not confer with his joint chiefs of staff.
Republicans are putting party over country. Behavior that would have created shouts of outrage and indignation had it been a Democrat is accepted.
The Party of Reagan has become a Cult of Trump. The fate of our country is in the hands of a man who does what Communists want him to do.
This is who the Republicans defend. I weep for my country.
— Eric W. Overholt, Marin City
U.S. immigration policies
at odds with our values
People who commit crimes, such as entering or living in the United States illegally, are subject to punishment. But our Constitution’s Bill of Rights, which has been in effect since the beginning of our republic, forbids the federal government from imposing any “cruel and unusual” punishment.
The constitutional protection of the Eighth Amendment protects all “persons” in the United States, not just U.S. citizens. This restraint on government power was important to our founders who were quite familiar with the harsh abuses of British despotism that they had fought to overthrow.
One of the abuses our founders sought to prohibit was the use of unduly harsh punishment to “make an example,” in other words to deter others. The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment is a fundamental precept of what we stand for as a civilized nation.
But what could be more cruel than separating children from their parents? What could be more cruel than deporting someone who has lived in the United States for decades to a country they know nothing about? What could be more cruel than ripping people from their families and communities? The Trump administration’s cruel, harsh approach to immigration flies in the face of our nation’s values.
— David Schnapf, Greenbrae
Proud to be one of the ‘Trump-hating cry babies’
Penny Moreci of Novato says that she is proud of Trump and I should get over his election (Readers’ Forum, June 19). Someone who makes homophobic and misogynistic comments, acts in a self-serving manner, belittles our allies and sides with racists is not presidential. I think I’ll continue being a one of her “Trump-hating cry babies.”
— Scott Boore, Novato
Ethanol discussion needs to be based on facts
The letter in the June 16 Readers’ Forum regarding ethanol and the June 8 Marin Voice on the same topic are filled with misinformation among real data. Discussions on energy use and production are important, but need to be based on factual information, not made up red herrings.
• The articles state the intent was to increase renewable fuels. Not mentioned was that a preeminent original intent was to free us up from foreign oil dependence. The result, along with fracking: mission accomplished.
• There is a claim that ethanol is the cause of loss of 7.3 million acres of farmland. Completely ignored is that this is vastly overwhelmed by an estimated 1.5 million to 3 million acres per year loss to urban and suburban development (45 million to 90 million over the 40-year history of ethanol use). So to tackle farmland loss by focusing on ethanol is a diversion, particularly if one is interested in preserving the “good” farmland. If we curbed suburban-urban sprawl by a mere 15 to 20 percent with more efficient use, we could eliminate the conversion of poorer grassland for ethanol production.
• The claim is that corn prices have doubled. Today the price is $3.75 per bushel (52 cents in 1968 dollars, accounting for inflation). The price was $1.12 on June 17, 1968. So, the truth is the price of corn has dropped 53 percent, not doubled. The minimum wage was $1.60 in 1968. If it went up the same amount as corn it would be $5.36 today, not $7.25 (which most consider too low).
— David Kessell, Mill Valley
Not fair for taxpayers to finance wage hikes
The Marin IJ article regarding county wages (June 17) begins with the statement that one group has offered its opinion on whether Marin County employees deserve a raise.
Citizens for Sustainable Pension Plans is that group. I was quoted as saying there is nothing fair about forcing to pay for the Marin Association of Public Employees’ demand for higher wage increases than those offered by the Board of Supervisors.
MAPE demands call for wage increases of 3.5 percent, 4 percent and 3.5 percent. The county offered 2.5 percent, 2.5 percent and 2 percent. MAPE turned down the offer and has now voted to strike, citing once again the high cost of housing in Marin.
Not being able to afford to live in Marin is not unique to county workers and is not a valid reason to strike for higher wages. Many young adults, born and raised in Marin, cannot afford to live here, either.
And then there are those pesky statistics.
Transparent California data, based on the Federal Bureau of Labor statistics, places Marin County public employees in the top 1 percent of 2,867 counties surveyed nationwide.
Mary Hao, Marin County director of human resources, states their research shows that 90 percent of MAPE-represented job qualifications have a pay range that is, on average, 7.8 percent above several other cities and counties, including San Francisco, San Mateo, Napa, Sonoma, Solano, Alameda and Contra Costa.
I stand by my quote. There is nothing fair about demanding more from taxpayers unless efforts are made to stop the accumulation of unfunded retiree debt — now topping $700 million — that is causing taxpayers to buckle under the weight of parcel taxes, sales taxes and higher rates and fees.
— Jody Morales, Lucas Valley; founder, Citizens for Sustainable Pension Plans
