Letters to the Editor
Thanks for the support
Dear Independent,
On behalf of ERA The Masiello Group York and the Old York Historical Society, I would like to thank you for your sponsorship at our Third Annual Open Golf Tournament on Thursday, June 21.
We enjoyed a wonderful day of playing golf, fellowship with our teams, a delicious meal at the beginning of the day and, with your help, were able to raise $10,000 for a very worthy cause.
Again, thank you for your support. It was greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Ray Pape, Manager
ERA Masiello Group
York
Editor's note: The following three letters are part of a series from local high school students on a variety of issues. Watch for more in upcoming editions of The Independent.
Lower the drinking age
Dear Independent,
The legal drinking age is one of the most talked-about restrictions. Many people, including myself, believe that the drinking age should be brought back down from age 21 to age 18 because 18-year-olds are responsible enough to handle it. Others argue that it should remain at age 21 because they don't feel that 18-year-olds are responsible enough.
I feel that the drinking age should be 18 years of age because 18-year-olds are legal adults. They have to pay taxes, they can get married, vote and be charged as an adult for a crime. If an 18-year-old is responsible enough to handle all of these things, then they are responsible enough to handle alcohol. At age 18, a person can also elect to go to war and potentially die for his or her country. This is yet another responsibility that 18-year-olds are considered capable of managing.
In other countries, such as Germany, the drinking age is 18. In these places, 18-year-olds are given the responsibility to drink and most of them drink responsibly. Sure there are some that abuse this privilege, but there are people in the United States that are even older than 21 who still abuse this privilege. Responsibility isn't set in stone in a number; it is a mindset. Most people would agree that the mind of an 18-year-old isn't much different than the mind of a 21-year-old.
I believe that if the legal drinking age was to be lowered to 18 that kids under the age of 18 would also benefit from this. If the legal drinking age were at 18, then it wouldn't seem so far away to 15-, 16- and 17-year-olds. They wouldn't feel the need to break the law just to have a drink. Who doesn't want what they can't have?
If 18-year-olds are legally adults, then they should be fully treated as adults. After all, if a person can get married at 18, they should be able to legally have a glass of wine at their wedding. When soldiers come back from fighting a war for their country, they should be able to have a few beers at a bar to celebrate. Overall, 18-year-olds are responsible enough to handle many things, and the drinking age should be one of them.
Chris Durkin
YHS Class of 2009
York
U.S. needed in Iraq
Dear Independent,
It is one of the most controversial issues discussed in our country right now: whether or not to withdraw all U.S. forces from Iraq. Many believe we are accomplishing nothing in our Mideast efforts and had no right in the first place to "invade" Iraq.
It's not for oil; it's not for an "American Empire." It's for the People of Iraq, and their future; they need us. If we leave these people and this country high and dry now, we will have worked so hard and sacrificed so much for nothing.
The current U.S. foreign policy is based on providing no safe haven for terrorists. If the United States pulls troops out of Iraq now, we will definitely be creating a safe haven for terrorists where they will have the ability to reconsolidate and attack U.S. interests abroad or in the United States. It is clearly evident that our leaving would create more problems than our staying. If we were to leave, a power vacuum leading to regional instability - another Iraq/Iran war, Russians getting involved, Israel attacking Iran due to nukes, etc. - would inevitably occur. The purpose of all forms of terrorism is to create fear and intimidate individuals, governments or societies into cooperating with terrorists' religious, political, or ideological demands. The terrorists' goal is to cause massive death and destruction and create panic within a population; we cannot let this take place.
It is commonly argued that the War in Iraq is unfocused; we are mainly directing our actions against Islam as a whole. The American government is NOT targeting Islam as a whole but looking for the certain radical Muslims who want Americans dead. The War in Iraq cannot be seen as a direct threat to Islam but as one against violent extremists wishing to bring harm to our country and countrymen.
Another poor anti-war argument is the issue of President Bush proclaiming imperialism. The United States is not trying to expand the "American Empire." We are not trying to push anything upon Iraq that they are not fully willing to participate in. We are providing Iraqi people with opportunities for democracy and trying to give them a better way of life.
There is no hidden reason for fighting the war we are fighting; we are doing it to help the Iraqi people establish themselves. We are not asking for oil or land; we aren't fighting in sheer revenge; we are doing what's right. This Colin Powell quote is very suitable for the situation: "We have gone forth from our shores repeatedly over the last hundred years, and we've done this as recently as the last year in Afghanistan and put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of whom have lost their lives, and we have asked for nothing except enough ground to bury them in."
As the United States' initial mission was to liberate the people of Iraq from a horrible dictator and now that that's done we cannot halt our efforts to provide an efficient democracy for Iraq. To withdraw from Iraq would create consequences of monumental proportions. We would be faced with economical problems; Al Qaeda would achieve a humongous symbolic victory, and more likely than not, we would be forced to reinvade the country when the radicals take over again. The United States must remain on task and vigilant while Iraqi forces work out government structure differences, and Iraqi military and police forces have more time to train.
The sooner people back on the home front accept the fact that it is not yet time to pull out and start showing support for these troops, the better off our country and its efforts will be.
Evan Wallace
York
Quality before quantity
Dear Independent,
Childhood shapes the kind of person we become. It is important for kids to explore what they want to do in their lives. The more they study, the better grades they'll get on tests, making them more desirable to colleges. This betters their chances at making a lot of money and thus increasing their enjoyment of life, right? Partially.
It is more likely that children who study a lot will get good marks in school and acquire productive study habits. However, when students spend all of their free time in study, they don't have as much fun and, in some cases, may isolate themselves from social events. When they get into the real world, they may have less work projects, leaving more free time. It's likely that if they feel outcast in school, they will feel outcast outside of school, and this free time will be in lonely isolation. Co-authors of the book National Differences, Global Similarities: World Culture and the Future of Schooling, Gerald K. LeTendre and David P. Baker, note that the amount of homework given to students in countries of lower education is significantly greater than the amount of homework given students in countries of higher education. This indicates that the amount of homework doesn't correspond to the student's level of understanding.
Kids have been sucked into getting good grades so that they will be able to compete on the global scale. Many people from Asia, in particular, want to work and succeed. Kids trying to compete with students in Asia will study for hours into the night to ace a quiz or test the next day. This makes parents happy because they see that their kids are developing "good" work habits. But what parents may not realize is that the time their children spend studying late into the night is better spent sleeping. Often times, the later a person stays up, the more his or her thoughts will stray from studying. By staying up late, the kids also end up with less energy and focus the next day, making it harder to remember what was just studied. In addition to being counter-productive toward a good grade, staying up late is bad for people's health.
Parents, encourage your kids to do their homework, but do it in moderation. Encourage them to space two hours of studying a week into 10-minute chunks. This will keep them more interested and focused on their subjects but still allow for free time. If you think your kids are getting too much work for a balanced lifestyle, send a letter to your superintendent of schools asking for a reduced quantity of homework and increased quality.
Sincerely,
Ben Hecht
York
The Independent Letters Policy: The Independent welcomes letters and opinions on any subject. We do not accept anonymous letters. Letters should be 200 words or less. We reserve the right to edit submissions for length, accuracy, and/or legal reasons and to reject any material considered unsuitable for publication. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of The Independent or its staff.
Send your letters to the Editor at PO Box 6, York, ME 03909 or via email to editor@yorkindependent.net. Deadline for publication is 12:00 noon on the Monday prior to that week's publication
