The July 8 story on Sheriff Al Cannon and the July 9 op-ed by Daniel Ellsberg have one thing in common: Sheriff Cannon believes he need not obey any law which he feels conflicts with the Second Amendment of the Constitution. And Ellsberg believes he (and Edward Snowden) do not have to obey any law which conflicts with the First, Fourth or Fifth amendments to the Constitution.
I see no difference in any of their logic. The problem is that the logic leads to anarchy.
If every law enforcement officer only enforces those laws that he deems lawful, how does anyone govern? How does anyone know what is legal and what is not legal?
Ellsberg is a civilian, and if he wishes to break the law and pay the price that is his personal decision.
Cannon is an elected official. If he feels that he cannot obey the laws of the land he should do as Ellsberg did — act as a private citizen. He should not be allowed to run his own fiefdom as he sees fit. The best thing he could do is, as Snowden did, find someplace else in the world that he feels is more to his liking.
Park West Boulevard
Isn’t it preposterous in our laissez-faire state to have a law that limits the amount of electricity Furman University (or any business or institution for that matter) can produce from solar energy? Is innovation anti-business or anti-effective monopoly?
SCE&G takes quite a bit of our money. Does it need our protection as well?
Eighty Oak Avenue
The tone of a July 4 letter to the editor was quite revealing. It reflected the author’s rancor, envy and even jealousy over the successful re-emergence of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina and the positive publicity it has received.
I would think the writer would be happy. He and the majority of the clergy and parishioners who followed Mark Lawrence out of the Episcopal Church did so willingly and after years of planning their exit strategy.
They should be so elated and involved with future plans that they would have no need to excoriate the leaders of the Episcopal Church.
One would think they would enthusiastically be going about their business making Anglicans for a global age as their leader puts it. But this is not the case.
Letters to the editor of The Post and Courier and comments posted on the Episcopal News Service website reveal they are mired in resentment and terribly afraid of the consequences of their decision.
On the other hand, we in the Episcopal Church in South Carolina are moving forward. I was present in January at the glorious Eucharist that preceded the special convention at Grace Episcopal Church where the provisional bishop of the Episcopal Church in South Carolina was elected. Recently I attended a special Choral Eucharist with TEC’s Province IV Bishops.
In all of the years I’ve attended church, I have never experienced such spiritual joy. Nor have I been in the presence of such unity, love, hope and enthusiasm.
As for the gospel, I have never heard it preached more clearly, passionately, eloquently and meaningfully than from the lips of the Rev. John Zahl, associate priest; the Venerable Calhoun Walpole, vicar; and the Rev. Canon Michael Wright, rector, Grace Episcopal Church.
I am proud to be an Episcopalian, still in communion with our mother church, the Church of England.
I read attorney Debra Gammons’ July 16 column and want to affirm that I believe everything she wrote is true. She hit the nail on the head.
I also noted that Ms. Gammons is black, which means that so-called black community activists will probably ridicule and otherwise try to discredit her.
It is a tragedy that Trayvon Martin was killed in a scuffle that both he and George Zimmerman should have backed down from. But the jurors, acting under due authority of the law, rendered a verdict they deemed as correct and fitting for the circumstances.
Black community activists speaking their half-truths and the media have turned the verdict into a “black versus white” battle, further fueling the flames of racial tension. If anything, the verdict proves the American justice system works and there is no cause to protest.
I question whether this would have made the national news had Trayvon Martin been white. I think not. I challenge the media and black community activists to prove me wrong.
Oyster Bay Drive
I applaud Maj. Gen. Charles J. Dunlap Jr.’s June 18 commentary. He has made the case for women continuing to consider the military as well as I could possibly attempt.
While I have the greatest respect for Sen. John McCain, his lack of “unqualified support” for women joining our military is disappointing at best and, as Maj. Gen. Dunlap points out, harmful to our national defense at worst.
The statistics Maj. Gen. Dunlap cite show a very positive attitude by military members toward their leadership and its attitude toward and handling of sexual assault/harassment issues.
Compare these positive numbers with the attitudes of citizens toward their leadership in the White House and Congress and the military comes out looking pretty darned good.
He correctly points out the military isn’t perfect when it comes to the issue of sexual assault/harassment, but that seems to be a reflection of the realities of today’s culture and endemic to many if not all of our institutions, from education to business to government. Telling our daughters that they shouldn’t join our military is akin to saying they shouldn’t go to The Citadel or work for Google or be a page or intern in Congress.
None of these organizations is perfect, but each offers opportunities to young women not only to benefit themselves, but participate in eliminating any form of sexual assault/harassment they may encounter.
I have been fortunate to work with military women and to command units wherein they served. Many of them were outstanding soldiers, most were average soldiers, and a few were downright lousy soldiers, just like their male counterparts. Those in the first two categories made significant contributions to the success of their unit and the accomplishment of its mission.
I’d hope that young women and their parents will read Maj. Gen. Dunlap’s piece and continue to consider the military as a way to serve their country while at the same time gaining training, education, maturity and life experiences far in excess of other paths they may choose.
N. Warwick Trace
After celebrating the Fourth of July and thinking about the phrase “land of the free and the home of the brave,” I think we need to change that phrase to “land of the snoop and the home of the craven.”
Apparently we spy on everyone and collect information about everything, and we do it in accordance with rules that no one is permitted to know, which are overseen by judges who can’t disclose anything. So to be secure we can’t know what the security risks are, what the issues are or where we are at risk.
When I was a little boy and I would ask my father a question, his response was “because I am your father and I say so.” Good response to a 7-year-old, but to a country of adults who have concerns, this is insulting. Certainly security is important. and I don’t ascribe any malevolent intentions to all of this. It is a dangerous case of technical capabilities being far beyond intellectual and moral competence.
I feel a lot less secure now than I did before I knew that my government and my dishwasher and cell phone were monitoring me. I hope we have a fat dossier on our weakling president. Maybe we will find out what makes him tick.
Notice about comments: