Richmond Times-Dispatch: Place an Ad | Subscribe | Manage Account | Advertise With Us

Letters To The Editor

By Staff Reports
Published: January 6, 2009

Legal Immigrants Deserve Respect

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

Somehow, it seems letter-writer Amarillo Uasai ["U.S. Immigrants Deserve Respect"] is confused about immigration and, perhaps, appropriate uses of the English dictionary. Despite whatever was communicated to him (supposedly) by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, his visa grants permission for him to be in this country for a specified period of time. Staying beyond that time is outside of what is permitted -- which makes it illegal.

It is a privilege to visit this country, not a right.

Seth Anderson. Moon.

. . .

Editor, Times-Dispatch: It amazes me when people like letter-writer Amarillo Uasai, ["U.S. Immigrants Deserve Respect"] make immigrants who come into this country without permission and those who overstay their government-granted limited-time visa out to be people with rights under our laws. Each of those people has broken our laws and is thereby a criminal and here illegally.

What would Uasai do if he came home one day and found a stranger who had entered through his back door, sitting in his living room, eating his food, and consuming his available resources? I am sure he would call the police.

When I invite someone into my house, he or she is a welcome guest. When this country grants someone the right to enter, then he or she also is a welcome guest and should always be treated as such. Illegal immigrants are breaking two of God's laws: Thou shalt not steal and thou shalt not covet anything that belongs to a neighbor.

Under God's law, as Uasai stated, immigrants have a right to live and smile without breaking the two previous laws. Seth Rosenthal. Richmond.

Vouchers Will Fix Public Education

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

In his letter, "A Universal System Can't be Exclusive, Too," Greg Muzik mischaracterized my position on education. I'll spell out some details, so the public can see the different views of public education that Muzik and I represent. Our education system was created more than 100 years ago, when we believed in a centralized, one-size-fits-all approach to governance. That is why we insist that, to receive one's public education, one must accept if from a single, government monopoly.

Of course, wealthy Americans can afford to walk away from their public education and buy a second education at the independent school of their choice. Many thousands do so in spite of the economic coercion of our take-it-orleave-it system. I believe all Americans, regardless of wealth, deserve the privilege of applying for acceptance to the school of their choice, taxpayer vouchers in hand. I do not believe the poor should have to buy two educations to get the one they want, or be coerced into using the schools we pick for them.

Too often, though, opponents of school choice are unbothered by the plight of the poor. Their concerns of fairness apply not to people, but to schools. Muzik, for example, complained in an earlier letter that private schools would take the best students and public schools would have to "take what's left." That is a sad displacement of fairness analysis, endemic in the anti-choice crowd.

When we publicly fund independent education, an enormous, vibrant education industry will emerge, with innovation and excellence unheard of today. People's own judgments will be honored. Traditional public schools will remain available for students who choose them, or who aren't accepted at a private institution. This will not be the destruction of public education -- it will be the saving of it.

Tim Fite. Richmond.

Parent and Son Agree Tech is Safe

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

As a parent of two children, I cannot fathom the pain and loss the parents of victims in the massacre at Virginia Tech must feel. No one should have to bear the death of a child, especially from something so commonplace as living in a dorm or going to class. Firing Tech President Charles Steger and Chief of Police Wendell Flinchum, though, will not bring anyone back.

I have known Steger for nearly 25 years. One would be hard-pressed to find anyone more dedicated or caring. Through quiet leadership over his career at the university, Steger has contributed mightily to its growth and successes.

My son was recently accepted after applying for early decision to Tech for the fall of 2009. He chose Tech mainly because of the atmosphere he feels when he walks on the campus -- a sense of security.

Obviously, hindsight is a wonderful thing. We can always learn and improve when we look in a rearview mirror and dissect a plan, or in this situation, the unimaginable. Clearly, numerous steps have been taken to enhance safety on campus. I am confident that when my son enters Virginia Tech next fall, all will be done to keep him as safe as anyone can be in an open and free society.

I know of no one I would rather have in charge of the university my son will attend than Steger.

Curry A. Roberts, Va. Tech, Class of '80.

Richmond.