Founding Fathers

A new direction for this nation? In two foundational documents, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the founding fathers of this country established the direction of this nation. By intent and design, they constituted this nation as a representative democracy. In one of his more famous addresses delivered at Gettysburg in 1863, Abraham Lincoln referred to the creation of the founding fathers as "government of the people, by the people, for the people. " Only the rigid process of amendment, which those founding fathers had the foresight to establish, can change this direction.

Dear Editor, Isn't morals an offspring to each and every one of us who attended church and listened to the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ? You said in your "Thumbs up and down" column that religion should not dictate the law concerning Sunday liquor sales. Was it religion or morals of our founding fathers who enacted our Constitution and our Bill of Rights? Why not just leave those two words out when making policy of laws in the city of Danville. I am sure the American Civil Liberties Union will be pleased and applaud all your endeavors.

Dear Editor: A recent letter about gun owners rights and the so-called "progressive movement to disarm Americans" shows that the conservatives still cling to the same old formula every four years. No one is going to take away Americans' right to keep and bear arms. I have guns myself and if someone would like to call me liberal, then that's fine with me. The conservatives bring up the same old ridiculous garb every election. I think it's funny that they would use our founding fathers and the Constitution as an example to assure their guarantee to keep arms but ignore that our founding fathers and the Constitution also founded our country on separation of church and state.

Dear Editor: It looks as though last Monday's letter complaining about the fish symbol on the back of a local cruiser has stirred up quite a bit of controversy. While I disagree with the premise of the letter, I respect the author's right to express her opinion and be heard. My point, though, is that everyone from musical performers, to the television/movie industry, to the art world seems to be quick to point out that the freedom of speech covers their expression. Yet it seems that those same people are not willing to acknowledge a Christian's right to express their most deeply held conviction for fear that they might offend someone who believes differently.

Dear Editor, Mr. Milton Reigelman wrote discussing the Second Amendment and stated that the Supreme Court has discussed whether it is a state right or an individual right to bear arms. There has been much discussion among constitutional scholars about this. Some have said it as a state right, but more see it as an individual right. On March 9, the U. S. Court of Appeals for District of Columbia outlawed the Washington handgun ban because it violates the Second Amendment. This ban prevented law abiding citizens from owning handguns.

Dear Editor, I will attempt to explain just why Mr. Reigelman's explanation of the Constitution's Second Amendment is inaccurate. First, he states the right to bear arms is a "collective" right and not an "individual" right. I refer you to the words of some of our founding fathers who wrote the amendment. I have chosen but a few quotes among many that prove the intent was not a "collective" right but an "individual" right, just as in all the Bill of Rights. "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.

Dear Editor, Milton Reigelman and Michael Denis can sell themselves a pseudo-intellectual bill of goods where the Second Amendment is concerned, but I prefer common sense. Although my military training never exceeded that offered by JROTC, and I have not owned a gun for some years, it is patently obvious to me that an armory used for storage of weapons for "collective" use is a tactical and strategic weak point. Much easier to shut down a militia by capturing a single armory than rounding up or fighting its individual members who had their guns - where?

In response to Roger Bowman's letter to the editor, I would be happy to turn down Social Security and Medicare. I believe Social Security, Medicare and the income tax are three of the biggest mistakes this country has ever made. If Obamacare is allowed to stand, it will be the fourth. Perhaps Mr. Bowman and the rest of the socialists out there are the ones who need to get educated about the founding of this nation and the meaning of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers feared nothing more than an all powerful central government and wrote the Constitution to protect us as individuals from the government.

Grayson's Tavern was a key player in the formation of Kentucky. In 1786, a group of 30 Danville residents formed the Political Club and often met at the tavern. The men debated and discussed issues that influenced the course of statehood. "Call it a quirk of fate or an accident of history, these men made as important a contribution to the future of Kentucky as the founding fathers did to the future of the United States," reads a brochure for Constitution Square State Historic Site.

Dear Editor: In response to Rich Lowry's article on Harvard scholar Samuel Huntington's new book "Who Are We?", I would like to say I am totally shocked and dismayed that someone of such a prestigious institution as Harvard could write something which is such a distortion of historical fact and obvious ignorance of basic American history. I am from a white, Anglo-Saxon and Protestant upbringing, which I am proud of, but in my courses of study at the University of Kentucky for 31/2 years, American History at Danville High School and eighth-grade American History and ninth-grade Civics at Burgin Independent, I learned that we are a bilingual nation in historical fact and actuality.

In response to the letter by Mr. Wing, I followed his suggestion and did my homework and I found that the meaning of “deism,” put simply, is belief in a god who is hanging around somewhere and that Christ is deemed unnecessary. Of the 118 “Founding Fathers,” signers of  the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of the Confederation and The Constitution, only a handful leaned toward deism. Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Ethan Allen and John Adams more or less embraced that philosophy.

In response to Roger Bowman's letter to the editor, I would be happy to turn down Social Security and Medicare. I believe Social Security, Medicare and the income tax are three of the biggest mistakes this country has ever made. If Obamacare is allowed to stand, it will be the fourth. Perhaps Mr. Bowman and the rest of the socialists out there are the ones who need to get educated about the founding of this nation and the meaning of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers feared nothing more than an all powerful central government and wrote the Constitution to protect us as individuals from the government.

In the beginning, there was an idea in George Foreman's head. It was of a day of bands - brass bands. The Advocate Brass Band was three or four years old. Foreman, managing director of the Norton Center for the Arts and conductor of the Advocate Brass Band, talked to his friend Vince DiMartino, then a professor of music at the University of Kentucky in Lexington. They were on their way to a postcard show in Cincinnati. "George collects ephemera," DiMartino explained, noting Foreman is the only one who could've gotten him to go to a postcard show.

A new direction for this nation? In two foundational documents, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the founding fathers of this country established the direction of this nation. By intent and design, they constituted this nation as a representative democracy. In one of his more famous addresses delivered at Gettysburg in 1863, Abraham Lincoln referred to the creation of the founding fathers as "government of the people, by the people, for the people. " Only the rigid process of amendment, which those founding fathers had the foresight to establish, can change this direction.

Dear Editor, A reporter on TV was interviewing some people at random and one of the questions he asked the people was this: Who are you going to vote for and why? The answers that the people gave were somewhat varied but one underlying theme was this - they either liked the candidate's position on social issues or they liked his/her position on fiscal issues. Those who make social issues their priority in deciding who to vote for remind me of the comment by Ben Franklin.

Dear Editor, Mr. Milton Reigelman wrote discussing the Second Amendment and stated that the Supreme Court has discussed whether it is a state right or an individual right to bear arms. There has been much discussion among constitutional scholars about this. Some have said it as a state right, but more see it as an individual right. On March 9, the U. S. Court of Appeals for District of Columbia outlawed the Washington handgun ban because it violates the Second Amendment. This ban prevented law abiding citizens from owning handguns.

Dear Editor, I will attempt to explain just why Mr. Reigelman's explanation of the Constitution's Second Amendment is inaccurate. First, he states the right to bear arms is a "collective" right and not an "individual" right. I refer you to the words of some of our founding fathers who wrote the amendment. I have chosen but a few quotes among many that prove the intent was not a "collective" right but an "individual" right, just as in all the Bill of Rights. "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.

Dear Editor, Milton Reigelman and Michael Denis can sell themselves a pseudo-intellectual bill of goods where the Second Amendment is concerned, but I prefer common sense. Although my military training never exceeded that offered by JROTC, and I have not owned a gun for some years, it is patently obvious to me that an armory used for storage of weapons for "collective" use is a tactical and strategic weak point. Much easier to shut down a militia by capturing a single armory than rounding up or fighting its individual members who had their guns - where?

Dear Editor, Isn't morals an offspring to each and every one of us who attended church and listened to the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ? You said in your "Thumbs up and down" column that religion should not dictate the law concerning Sunday liquor sales. Was it religion or morals of our founding fathers who enacted our Constitution and our Bill of Rights? Why not just leave those two words out when making policy of laws in the city of Danville. I am sure the American Civil Liberties Union will be pleased and applaud all your endeavors.

Dear Editor, In reference to Matthew Hollins' letter on Dec. 27, hooray for the silent majority finally speaking out. I agree with Mr. Hollins, our founding fathers had a reason for putting "In God we Trust," "Under God," not only on money, but also on many of the government buildings, etc. in Washington. The silent majority needs to speak out more, before all the things this country stands for are taken away. Any official that can't see this needs to be replaced. People come here from everywhere.