Re: Bill Connor’s letter dated July 19. First of all, let me say that I admire Mr. Connor greatly. He is a scholarly man blended with a high degree of patriotism, civil service and religious conviction.

You can’t get much better than that!

I would like to make note of the fact that most private schools represent a grouping of students with similar cultural backgrounds reducing the stress level in the educational environment. Of course this fact has a tendency to increase the efficiency of the school function. If a parent would like to include religion in the child’s education, then that represents an option but not a necessity. Notice the quotation from our founding fathers given by Mr. Connor did not specify any particular religion.

The public school, on the other hand, is mandated by law to accept anyone in the proper age bracket that is classified as human and be successful in the education effort. In many cases, the public school is a representation of every social problem within a community. In this case, the stress level is very high and a lower efficiency of the educational function is a reasonable expectation.

Of course there are many strategies for private facilities to guard against isolationism as well as strategies afforded in the public facility to ensure the nurturing of students. It is simplistic for anyone to insist that a display of the Ten Commandments would solve all our problems. As noted by Mr. Connor, moral decay has been upon us for decades. The important thing here is the freedom of choice afforded to everyone. We are in a period of change unlike any before with no end in sight. Change is uncomfortable for some people.

I certainly hope that Mr. Connor has not fallen into the grip of the radical religious right. In the 1980s, this group made the Republican Party their choice and have made inroads into the party ever since. (Google “radical religious right politics.”) This is a subject too broad to be discussed on this page, but a little research will give insight into a major shift building in our political structure.

Mr. Connor’s statement that homosexuality was illegal at the time of the writing of the Constitution is accurate. But what should we do? I know he does not suggest that we put all homosexuals to death. All living things are sexual as a necessity to ensure the propagation of the species. Humans are spiritual as well as sexual. Of course spiritualism takes many forms. Many people have decided that spirituality should regulate sexuality.

Research has indicated homosexuals are more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous. If this is true, then is there a genetic connection? If this is the case, then homosexuals are a specific group and should fall under the civil rights laws. Also, if there is a genetic base, it will be interesting to see how the church will handle this development since homosexuality is classified as a sin according to the Bible. After all, the Church put Galileo under house arrest for life because he dared to suggest that the earth (church) was not the center of the universe.

I hope it is obvious to all that democracy and capitalism are man-made concepts designed for a specific group within a specific boundary. I do not believe spirituality fits this scenario. I believe spirituality is between the individual and his maker and has no boundaries and can stand on its own merits. Because of the divisive nature of religion, I believe the evolution of a religious Republican Party opposed to a secular Democratic Party is bad for our country.

I believe most citizens do not want a government legislating morality and religion. As we are a world power, we should ask how we can become a world leader. I think the only answer is the “Golden Rule,” combined with tolerance and common sense backed by a “big stick.”

Vote for me for president!

— Albert C. Watson, Orangeburg

You must be logged in to comment.