Letters to the editor

Parents’ responsibility vs. children’s rights

Yet again, the courts have taken a stand favoring the granting of “rights” to some groups while removing them from others (“Mom’s eavesdropping violated privacy law,” American Scene, Nation, Friday).

Ignoring the details of the case and focusing on the broader issue, what the Washington Supreme Court did was grant broad privacy rights to minor children while depriving parents of one means of carrying out their legal responsibilities for monitoring their children and their children’s behavior.

What comes to mind is the Columbine High School massacre. In that case, the parents of the killers both implicitly and explicitly were held responsible by the media and by the nation for not being aware of their children’s activities and for not intervening. Had they done so — by listening to their children’s telephone conversations or monitoring their Internet activities, for example — they may have saved many lives.

As a parent, it seems to me that the courts cannot hold parents responsible for the behavior of their minor children while simultaneously granting rights to their minor children that deprive parents of the very means to carry out their legal responsibilities. Which way do the courts and the court of public opinion want it?

GORDON E. FINLEY

Miami

Back door is left open

In the article “House OKs intelligence reform bill,” (Page 1, Wednesday), there is this statement: “The House last night approved a comprehensive overhaul of the nation’s intelligence community, despite objections from a host of Republicans that the bill was flawed and should be voted down.”

President Bush and many legislators are committed to supplying U.S. merchants with taxpayer-subsidized foreign labor. In order to accomplish this, Mr. Bush and his buddies, the U.S. merchants, did a lot of arm-twisting. I can just hear the phones of congressmen ringing and political campaign donors threatening not to donate money for re-election campaigns.

This is the reason why the House bill was gutted of the immigration provisions. The U.S. merchants and their lackeys, the corrupt politicians, have seen to it that illegal immigration remains protected against our laws.

Story Continues →