Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Be guided by true spirit of the holidays

Re: Bring back the spirit of Christmas past to area, Dec. 2 Times:

We've seen our politically correct considerations in action and in the spirit of inoffensive, neutral and bland language, some values still persist even when marketing substitutes our more familiar holiday expressions with the more general sayings, as identified in the column by Andrew Skerritt.

As a child, I was never offended by any holiday expressions or sayings, nor did I understand the true meaning of the separation of church and state, which certainly needs an explanation, i.e., what's the new interpretation compared to the original meaning. (That's another letter, though.)

Aside from that, the outcome of the ongoing "Merry Christmas" debate this season may happen by commercial boycott, as we've heard during some media interviews on the subject and in some corporate responses regarding "Merry Christmas" vs. "Happy Holidays." Not to blame the lower echelons who pin up the signs and deliver the advertising contracts, we also should know that someone in management, a network, or a "team approach" approved the cost of all the banners and advertisements with all the neutral, "PC" holiday messages across whole organizations and in the media.

Finally, as in Miracle on 34th Street when William Frawley explained to the judge what would happen if he didn't declare the individual in court as Santa Claus, as in the "true" spirit of Christmas, and also the potential outcome of a negative decision (i.e., his future in the judiciary with all the merchants and voters whom he'd ultimately upset). That was a strategic personal decision as well as a mature corporate decision; that's how it works behind the scenes as a pragmatic, business approach to the holidays.

Hopefully, we'll see an epiphany in the writing and advertising of holiday commercialism without any negative effect on the economy, i.e., that boycotting idea. That should challenge the advertisers and businesses to create a real epiphany, i.e., to rediscover the empathy we should have toward one another during all our holidays, not as a marketing war with World Wrestling Federation tactics on the floors of the retail stores.

That's our responsibility for the holidays; we should hope and pray for everyone to be better connected, included, recognized and tolerant during the holidays; that spirit also should guide our behavior and conduct in between the holidays.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

Animal crimes nothing minor

Re: Animal advocate groups bend prosecutor's ear, Dec. 1 Times:

Violent crimes against animals are often precursors to crimes against humans, as illustrated in staff writer Michael Kruse's article. However, criminologists often assert that violent offenders "graduate" from animal victims to human victims. This implies that crimes against animals are only "undergraduate" or not as significant in themselves.

Victims of all violent crimes suffer unimaginable horrors, and animals have an equal capacity to suffer from this physical and mental torture.

How does $174,375 sound?

Re: County's teachers have it pretty darned good, Nov. 30 letter by James Hendricks:

Mr. Hendricks, I am behind you all the way in regards to teachers having it "pretty darn good." We should join together with like-minded folks and explain to the School Board that, after all, teachers are not much more than glorified babysitters anyway, right? All they seem to do is complain about their lack of pay, when they really should only get paid for babysitting. Now that's a great idea; I hope you will agree.

I did some research, Mr. Hendricks, on the babysitting qualifications, benefits and pay. I found there are no educational requirements. Benefits included free transportation to and from the job site, free food and beverage, use of phone, TV, videos, video games and the use of a computer. The average pay for a babysitter is $5 per hour per child.

I think that's just about right for our teachers (babysitters), don't you? So, let's see, that would be $5 per hour per child and teachers have an average of 25 students per class so that would be $125 per hour or for 73/4 hours, or $968.75 a day for the 190 days they get paid for (notice I said "paid for," not the days over 190 for which they get nothing), they would make $174,375 per teacher per year.

How does that sound to you?

You know you forgot to mention that your worker gets time-and-a-half or double-time for hours beyond their 40-hour week. Teachers, on the other hand, get nothing for all the extra hours spent chaperoning after-school dances, weekend field trips, open houses at night and sports events, just to name a few. Or, would Mr. Hendricks' solution be to just do away with those activities?

You are comparing unskilled minimum wage earners to a college-educated professional who has at least a bachelor's degree and has passed several state-level tests, as well as having to meet continuing education requirements in order to maintain a teaching certificate. Mr. Hendricks' imaginary "worker" has no such requirements.

Given the amount of time, effort and money to get a degree, the difference in pay is not that great, not when you consider the responsibility. Having the responsibility of educating children for their future is far greater than the average minimum wage earner. (I'm by no means bashing minimum wage earners.)

You also missed the boat on health insurance. Most families can't afford the cost of $632 a month.

[Last modified December 8, 2005, 00:50:19]