Wrongly accused can't get back reputation
Where does Justin Gillingham go to get back his name and reputation?
Since accused of something he didn't do last May, Justin's name and face have been prominently displayed in your newspaper.
You pat yourselves on the back by trumpeting the fact that, "The Daily Star has a policy of not identifying the victims or alleged victims of rape," yet you have no compunctions about printing such information about alleged perpetrators, innocent until proven guilty.
Now that Justin has been exonerated by a jury of his peers, what will you do to compensate him? Justin sat in the Otsego County Correctional Facility for nearly a year, enduring the insults of other inmates and the "realities" of the system. He was separated from his family, including his child, for something he didn't do. Where was his right to a "speedy" trial?
As one of the area pastors privileged to serve in the Jail Ministry of Otsego County, I know that too many inmates in county jails languish there for long periods of time because they cannot afford bail. They stand accused, and cannot easily "prove" their innocence, since the system is stacked against young males. They are forced to choose between the proverbial rock and a hard place _ a plea bargain brought to them by their public defender, which guarantees their legal "guilt" but a shorter sentence, or going to trial and risking an unsympathetic jury that will convict them and send them to state prison for a long time.
I commend Justin for having the courage of his convictions _ for turning himself in, for admitting immediately what he did do, and for refusing to plead out to something he did not do. I wish the same for many others falsely accused and falsely incarcerated.
The Rev. Paul R. Messner
Oneonta
Messner is pastor of Otsego County Lutheran Parish.
Naming right, wrong for all is dangerous
Go to YouTube, search "Sarah Palin Vanderburgh Right to Life," play clip three of four. At 5:50 into the clip, watch Sarah Palin explain how she decided, in her own words, to "choose life."
With pretzel logic, she enthralled her anti-choice audience with her own story of choice. She made a hard choice, and I applaud her for it.
But her personal circumstances (good job, supportive family, health insurance, etc.) are not enjoyed by many other women; facing a more-dire future, her decision might have been different. Her right to choose, guaranteed by our federal government and supported by groups such as Planned Parenthood, let her to decide what to do.
History is replete with terrifying episodes when a dedicated few have seized the reins and made decisions for everyone; Thomas O'Connell's eugenics bogeymen and the Spanish Inquisition both come to mind.
Some fear letting women make their own choices (especially choices that demonstrate unabashed disdain for others' articles of faith), but that fear is misguided. What should be feared is giving others the power to make such choices for you.
Janet Wenner's contention that "some choices are, in and of themselves, wrong" might be true for an individual, but our society functions because we have agreed to balance individual rights with our collective needs. Your right to free speech does not allow you to yell "fire!" in a theater.
Your right to observe and cherish the sanctity of life does not allow you to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term. Claiming you know "right and wrong" for everyone is risky: someone with more friends or a bigger stick might decide they know what's right and wrong for you!
If you are really serious about fighting abortion, promote contraception and realistic, practical sex education.
Stuart Anderson
Otego
