| Press Responsibility
| [Home
Page] [Alternate Navigation] |
|
| PRESS RESPONSIBILITY CONTENTS: Overview Vol. I - Ethics Vol. II - Plagiarism Vol. III - D. Motko Omissions/Deletions More Analysis Closing Post Script OMISSIONS & DELETIONS Introduction: Index: Unpublished letters critical of The Daily Review: John Schoonover 9/13/98 Marilyn Bok 6/10/99 Ruth Tonachel - 12/7/99 & 5/3/2000 Jeffrey Gonzalez – 3/9/01 The meaning of writers' letters changed by the Editor [**Editor's deletions are noted in red**]: Katie Replogle 1/23/2000 Dave Turissini 3/17/2000 Barb Coyle 3/19/2000 Clark Moeller 3/11/01 Andrew B. Duvall III 02/09/02 |
| |
(Unpublished) September 13,1998 Dear (Towanda Daily Review) Editor: I've watched with interest as The Daily Review completes its transformation from newspaper to tabloid. Things are moving along nicely, and I trust that you are satisfied with the results. Screaming headlines, a focus on the negative, bogus and inflammatory surveys, and a self-righteous view of our area from the editorial page must surely be selling more papers than that old-fashioned "tell people the news and let them make up their own minds" approach. I personally enjoy the screaming headlines. My recent favorites include "Plane Crash" as the header for an article describing a pilot's forced landing in a field that led to $50 damage to the aircraft and no injuries, and something like "President Weakened:" as the headline for an article reporting the opinion of a local professor. Even today's (Sunday's) paper had a good one: "Congressional race could get ugly" heads an article in which the race between Casey and Sherwood is described as being free of mudslinging. But, if there is going to be any, says another local professor, it will happen between now and the election. (I hope you didn't pay much for that nugget.) I look forward now to the real stuff. Enquiring minds will want to know that "President Kennedy found living with aliens on moon!!!! Woman gives birth to giraffe baby!!! Earth to explode!!!" And by the way, kudos for your report of the shocking and outrageous events at the special Athens Township Supervisors meeting. I enjoyed your front page, two-column of "Mill's Pride sparks fracas at meeting." It was a nice touch to subordinate the report of the other 90% of the meeting (where that stupid zoning g stuff took place) to what looks like a sidebar. Contrast the boring coverage of the meeting by the Evening Times, who used up their two columns to report that "Athens Township supervisors unanimously OK zoning," and left the "fracas" to a much smaller article. They obviously just don't get it. Another gauge of your success in this area, in my mind, is when School Board Members are heard to say, "I wonder what meeting they attended," after reading your coverage of board meetings. If you can maintain your focus on the fascinating reports of shame and scandal that are often provided by a couple of the board members rather than allow yourselves to be distracted by the dull education business that goes on at those meetings, your circulation is bound to reach new heights. Finally your surveys are outstanding. I think you have found the key to success there as well; Pick a topic on which you can be pretty certain there are some strong negative feelings, phrase the question so it is sure to push the buttons of the people who have those feelings, and sit back and wait for the phone to ring. (Tough luck on the "Do you think school boards need to take a harder-line {sic}on teacher's contracts in order to hold down salaries?" I thought you had a winner, and I was as baffled as you must have been when it didn't get a resounding "Yes, Yes, Yes, Bomb them back to the stone age" kind of response.) I have a few suggestions for future surveys. How about: "Should the State Police increase their patrols in the county so we all aren't murdered in our beds?" or, "Should students with nose rings be allowed to attend school along with decent kids?" or, "Should Mill's Pride be allowed to pollute Athens township?" Of course, you do a great job on your own, so I certainly won't be upset if you don't use them. Well, please accept my congratulations for your good work. You're making wonderful progress and I'm sure that a slot at the checkout counters of our local grocery stores is only a matter of time. Oh, one last suggestion for a survey question: Should The Daily Review give some thought to its responsibility to the community and decide if it perhaps ought to deliver the news in a balanced, factual, and non-inflammatory way?" John Schoonover, Towanda Back to index |
| |
(Unpublished) Who's Condemning Whom for Bogus Polling June 10, 1999 A headline in the May 14 edition of The Daily Review in large, bold type reads "Poll bashes incumbent commissioners." The article states, "Nearly 64% of the callers said that Commissioners Goeckel, Pickett and Lewis have not done a good enough job to earn another term in office." Yet on election day, May 18, when the public really voiced its opinion, all the incumbents won over their opponents by a minimum of 1,000 votes. Now I ask, "How can this be?" Presently I run my own business, M-BRS Research and Consulting Services. One of the services I provide is conducting survey market research, both telephone and mail surveys, for clients on many issues. As a member of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), one must sign a Code of Professional Ethics and Practices and pledge to maintain high standards of scientific competence and integrity in conducting, analyzing, and reporting our work and in our relations with respondents, clients, and the public. For a "poll" to be valid there are many standards that must be met. A researcher must be very careful about how the question is worded, the order of the questions, who should be asked to participate, how they are selected, and how they are contacted, to mention only a few. A mistake in any of these areas can make the survey invalid. When a newspaper first started running their "polls" I made it known to the editor that the results of his "polls" were not valid. I offered to explain why. That offer wasn't accepted and the "polls" continue. I waited for my opportunity to discuss publicly how misleading these "polls" are. On May 18 that opportunity presented itself. In short, the "polls" being conducted weekly by this newspaper don't represent public opinion of the people who call in, and that can be anybody, anywhere in the world, and as many times as they wish. This is exactly what happens week after week. People who feel strongly about an issue call or e-mail their vote to the paper. It doesn't matter where you live. Conducting the "poll" this way, the paper never hears from the silent majority. When newspapers like The New York Times or The Philadelphia Inquirer want to find out how the public feels about an issue they hire a legitimate research firm to conduct the poll for them, i.e. Ropetr, Gallop, etc. These firms purchase a random sample of phone numbers of the public to be interviewed. This could be all the residents of a state, a county, or only a well defined portion of the population i.e. only registered voters, or only people over the age of 50. Using a statistical formula they figure out how many completed surveys they need for a certain degree of accuracy. If The Review really wanted to know what the results of the last election were going to be right before the election and they wanted to be 95 % sure the results would be accurate to a plus or minus 3%, they would have had to obtain approximately 900 completed survey from a random sample of telephone numbers drawn from the total households in Bradford County (22,492 from the 1990 US Census). To get a random sample one could go through the phone book and call every sixth number until they had 900 completed surveys, but you would miss anyone with a an unlisted number. Another way is to purchase it from a company who specializes in developing such lists, which is more expensive but quick and inclusive. When doing a primary election "poll," the sample should only contain people over the age of 18 years, only those who are registered to vote (Republican or Democrats), and only people who live in Bradford County. The profile of those who answered the survey should match the profile of the county by age, sex, marital status, income level, and voter registration preference. This is why researchers ask these types of questions at the end of a legitimate survey. Without this information they cannot use your answers. How can an average citizen tell a "poll" is legitimate? At a minimum it should tell you who sponsored the survey: who conducted it; give the exact wording of the questions asked including any instructions or explanations that might affect your response; describe who is being surveyed and how the sample was drawn; give the size of the sample, the completion rate, and eligibility criteria; discuss the exact findings including an estimate of sampling error (accurate to plus or minus a certain percent); if any results were based on only part off the sample and the method, location and dates of data collection. There are five survey practices AAPOR condemns. Two of them are representing the results of "self-selected polls" as if they were the outcome of legitimate research and the conducting of "push polls". The other three are soliciting money contributions as part of the survey, offering products or services for sale or for generating sales leads, and revealing the identity of the person who answered the survey without permission. This newspaper publicly condemned others for their part in "push polls" and yet continues to mislead the public into believing the results of their "self-selected polls" represents public opinion. It seems The Daily Review needs to clean up its own act before condemning others. I was taught a newspaper's job was to publish the news, not make it. I'm left wondering, "Why would The Review continue this practice when they know their results are misleading?" The residents of Bradford County deserve better. If The Review really wants to know how the public feels about an issue, they should do what their competitors do, conduct legitimate research. They should stop trying to influence public debate with misleading information. They should stop degrading the public's trust in an honorable institution, which up until recently, has earned the public's respect. Marilyn Bok, President of M-BRS Research and Consulting Services, Towanda (CPR Volume I, pp 61-63) Back to index |
| |
(Unpublished) 12/7/99 Dear Editor, Your recent reader poll question regarding the enforcement of drunk driving laws is one of the most irresponsible items I have yet to see in the Daily Review. How can you possibly ask "are drunk driving laws too strictly enforced?" Your question was obviously slanted in its phrasing and run at a time of year (Thanksgiving holidays and deer season) when lots of people are disobeying the law and mad if they get caught. In high school, we learn that in America, we elect people to represent us in government and to pass laws that are in the best interest of citizens. If the law is wrong (and some are), then work to change it! If the law is just, then it should be enforced 100%. There is no such thing as enforcing "too strictly." (Though admitedly, we do have cases of individual law enforcement officers going beyond the law at times). Drunk driving laws were enacted to prevent accidents caused by drunk drivers. Not too hard to figure that one out . . . As long as one person gets hurt by a drunk driver, then the law is not being fully enforced. Our Bill Of Rights grants the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". (In fact, laws to that effect were found unjust and were removed earlier in this century.) However, when one person drinking infringes on the rights of athers to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then we have a problem. When a drunk person drives a car on a public road, they endanger the basic rights of all others on that road. There is no way that stopping them from doing so can be construed as "too strict." Perhaps we need to encourage more public transsportation to help solve the problem. Drunks riding on buses, in taxis or on trains are far less dangerous to others than driving on the highway. My question to The Daily Review is what do you hope to accomnplish by presenting slanted questions and running unscientific, statistically invalid polls? This is not the first poll that invited negativity and lacked common sense and/or a measure of public responsibility. Who will answer, "Yes the laws are too strictly enforced"? Most likely, those who've been caughrt, especially repeatedly. Is it your goal to give weight and credibility to those who refuse to act responsibly, just because they place an anonymous phone call?? I hope not. You are reducing serious issues to garbage--on a weekly basis. I suggest you get rid of this divisive, manipulative and often offensive poll. Then, please try to use your newspaper pulpit to promote public good instead of tearing away at the already delicate fabric of our community.
Sincerely, (Unpublished) May 3, 2000 To Whom it May Concern: During 1999, I was repeatedly angered by the weekly "poll" conducted by The Daily Review in which anonymous callers would voice opinions in response to inflammatory questions posed by the paper's editors. In early December, I submitted the attached letter (above) to The Review via fax and email. The cover letter stated that it was intended for publication. Several days later, I found a message on my answering machine from Ian Fennell. He said he could not run my letter because it "said so many mean and nasty things about the paper and it libels the paper." He defended the polls as "popular" and said it never claimed to be scientific or statistically valid. He suggested we discuss a rewrite of my letter. I declined to do this, fearing it would be a waste of my time. Several weeks later, the poll questions ceased, only to be replaced by a completely open-ended forum for anonymous callers. This move took responsibility for the topics addressed off The Review but has led to even more divisive and ugly comments. I have read The Daily Review for most of the last 32 years. When my subscription expired in March,1. I could no longer write a check to support it. I feel that newspapers are an extremely important link within communities and that the Review is acting in a manner that is highly detrimental to our community and region. Sincerely, Ruth Tonachel, Towanda (CPR Volume I, p 66) Back to index |
| | January 17, 2000 (Daily Review) Editor: I was pleased to see that the Daily Review covered Lois Yeagle's talk at the North Orwell Union Church on Sunday, January 17. My partner and I attended the service, and we were moved to tears by Lois's articulate and powerful message. I was appalled, however, to see your reporter describe the pain Lois's son and others have suffered as being a result of "their choice of lifestyle" (his words, not hers). Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is neither a "choice" nor a "lifestyle." Lois stated this very clearly in her speech. As she pointed out, to reduce the broad diversity of the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered community to a "lifestyle" is demeaning and derogatory. There is a lot of ignorance about homosexuality in our world. I commend Lois Yeagle for working to educate people in her community. [**I hope the staff of this newspaper will take some lessons from her.**]
Regards, |
March 17, 2000 Editor, The Daily Review Dear Editor: In an article on aging issues that appeared in the March 16 edition of The Daily Review, the newspaper attributed Bradford County Commissioner Janet Lewis with stating that public transportation for senior citizens in Bradford County is unreliable. As the general manager of the Endless Mountains Transportation Authority, must take issue with that statement. [** Since Commissioner Lewis, as well as the other Bradford County Commissioners have been very supportive of public transportation in Bradford County, I can only surmise that The Review's coverage of the story made her quote sound derogatory, when it was never intended to sound so. A telephone conversation with her confirmed that fact. It would appear that the statement she presented to The Review related to the availability of volunteer drivers for home delivered meals, and that The Review incorrectly reported her statements as applying to public transportation.**] Last year, EMTA provided 25,000 trips to Bradford County Senior Citizens. These services ranged from trips to medical appointments to purely recreational in nature. A recent customer service survey showed that EMTA has over a 90% approval rating among current users, including senior citizens. EMTA does provide service into Waverly, Elmira and Corning, NY on specific days of the week as well as service to the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area. In addition, the cost of these services to Pennsylvania Seniors is no more than $2.00 per trip. The vast majority of services cost no more than 50-cents each way. Some services are absolutely free to seniors! If the commissioners or senior citizens in the county believe that public transit is unreliable, neither group has communicated that to EMTA.
Sincerely, |
| |
March 19, 2000 To the editor: So, Ms Darling believes that Scientists have "discovered" hell and better yet she thinks we should all know about it. As Danan Carvey would say on Saturday Night Live in his role as the "Church Lady", "Isn't that special!" Just a little bit of journalistic research on the urban legend she referred to would have uncovered the fact that it began as a hoax and has been verified to be just that. The "scientific" journal tht this myth was originally discovered in is actually a monthly Finnish Christian newsletter. They got the story from another paper that ran it in a feature column where anyone could write anything they wanted. [** Sort of the way this newspaper allows Ms. Darling to rule the editorial page with her own fiction.**] A Norwegian man, Age Rendalen, admits calling a Christian television station in the United States with the story. He also admits that he made it up because he just couldn't believe that anyone would really believe such nonsense. He said, "I couldn't believe that the hosts of the show would actually broadcast it without apparently having checked it out." [** I could say the same of the Review. **] This Christian legend has had legs. What is does not have is an ounce of truth in it.
Sincerely, |
| |
(Unpublished) March 9, 2001 Dear Editor: The Daily Review in Towanda, Pennsylvania has used a lot of ink and paper to push the case that John Jacobs and the Power Team Crusade should be welcomed into our Public Schools to provide in-school assemblies. The in-school assemblies are planned during the week of March 25th, the same week the Canton Ministerium will be holding evening evangelical programs featuring the Power Team Crusade. The Review's editorial staff, as well as columnists David Motko and Jill Darling and a host of letter writers have articulated their support, and chastised the Towanda School Board for their decision not to permit the in-school performance. I listened to the supporters of the Power Team on February 12th at the Towanda School Board meeting where they submitted their endorsements for the in-school assembly program. The following week, I re-checked the Power Team internet site, read reviews of their in-school assemblies, and personally contacted some of the Power Team references mentioned on thier web site. As a result, I have concluded that their program was similar other programs that have been given in our Towanda schools that have violated the First Amendment of our Constitution by trying to convert students to a religion or promoting a religion.. At the next Towanda School Board meeting, I spoke against a Power Team in-school assembly as proposed by the Canton Ministerium. I cited my concerns such as the Power Team’s lack of credentials, lack of curricula, or any coherent message about youthful decision making. I noted that the Power Team offered no documentation relating to their effectiveness in preventing drug use, etc. I said the Power Team seemed to use the same modus-operandi that we have seen before used by the Campus Crusade for Christ's, Athletes in Action presentation in Athens School District. The Athletes in Action also had promised not to promote their religious faith or recruit students to evening evangelical programs. Despite these assurances, the Athletes in Action broke their promise. Before we experienced the dishonest, bait and switch tactics of the Athletes in Action, Towanda School District had other similar programs. After one such program several years ago, then Superintendent Betty Cox assured me it will not happen again. Later it was then Superintendent Daniel Paul who assured me that the district’s administrators were assured no witnessing or proselytization would occur. They too were sorry and that it won't happen again. Now we have the Power Team. Their supporters also are promising there will be no proselytizing. Do we see a pattern here? By a margin of 6-2, the Towanda School Board directed the superintendent not to schedule Power Team in-school assembly. The Board then voted unanimously to allow an after-school evening program in the school, which was appropriate because the Power Team’s evening program will not be a school sponsored program. As an involved parent with children now in High School, Middle School and Elementary school, and as a member of the Bradford County Alliance for Democracy, I feel compelled to respond to the onslaught of pressure on the members of Towanda Area School Board reverse their decision about the Power Team. It is in the roles of parent and citizen that I, along with others, protested the past inappropriate religious programs conducted in area public schools that have violate the civil rights of parents and students. It is time for a school policy to clarify religious practices allowed in public school. Let’s remember that a public school is part of our government: we elect the school directors and we pay for the schools with our taxes. A student or teacher may pray in public school as an individual. Student run religious clubs may exist, but the public school or its teachers or administrators may not establish or direct a religious club, or sanction a prayer. Schools can teach about religions, about their rituals, observances, beliefs, and history. What the public school can not do is promote or endorse religious beliefs or sanction any prayer. To do so is illegal. Since 1940, the United States Supreme Court has rule thus in 13 decisions. To do so is also immoral, because it makes a lie of their promises not to. The First Amendment’s separation of church and state is what keeps the peace in our land which has over 1,600 denominations and sects, most of whom do not agree with each other on fundamental religious notions. The letters to the editor, my personal conversations with supporters of the Power Team, and editorial content of The Daily Review, have confirmed one thing: the mission of the Power Team is the mission of the local organizers for the in-school program: "To be a ministry of excellence and integrity with our heartbeat and focus on winning the lost, building the local church, and encouraging the pastor." One supporter claimed that I never asked for the credentials for other groups. Wrong! As a parent on the program committee and as treasurer for the school’s PTG, we always checked credentials, sought and verified references, and sought out age appropriate programs. We looked for school assembly programs with themes that complimented the existing school curricula. We always obtained approval by the PTG's leadership, and the school’s principal, prior to contracting with an individual or group who were to present a program. What I stated at the School Board meeting on February 19th was that, "If an assembly is held by a non-credentialed group, (non-certified educators), then they should have a curricula, or provide data that the program has beneficial value." Remember, the school was offered this Power Team program, our School District did not request it and, historically, all too many of the unsolicited programs supplied by religious organizations broke their promises about doing only a secular program. It appears to me that the real goal of the Canton Ministerium, who are promoting the Power Team's in-school assembly, is exactly the same as that of the Power Team’s mission: “....building the local church, and encouraging the pastor." which I quoted above. On Feb 12th, one of the Canton Ministerium's spokespersons pointed out that this program will cost their host's over $25,000. It was made clear at the meeting that it is very important to fill all the available slots during the Power Team's weekdays. Is that because the fees charged the schools reduces the overhead associated with the evening crusade? Could it be because it helps deliver paying members to the evening crusade? Both? I can't say, but I speculate it is a combination of both. I don't believe the interests of the organizers of this program are completely altruistic. Organizers would have us believe that this group would never cross the wall of separation between Church and State, as stated by their spokesperson at the February 12th Towanda School Board meeting. They claimed the Power Team would never witness to Christ or God and the Power Team always does assemblies that are secular in public schools. However, later statements published in The Daily Review contradicted this claim. Organizers of the Power Team were quoted as saying that if the public school asks their group not to advertise the evening program in the in-school assembly and ask the Power Team to refrain from witnessing, (or endorsing their particular beliefs), then the Power Team would agree to not do this. So, even though they know it is against the law to witness or proselytize during the in-school assemblies in the public schools, they do it unless asked not to. Their message is, “break the law if no one tells you not to.” Is that the message we want our children to learn? Jill Darling also wrote in support of the Power Team. As a Daily Review columnist, her themes have included denigrating homosexuals, singing the praise of those she considers her brand of Christian, and promoting home schooling. One of her arguments for home-schooling is that home schooling helps her keep her child's educational experience value based according to her values. However, apparently, Ms. Darling wants the children of other parents exposed to the Power Team even if the Power Team’s message conflicts with their parents’ religion. It’s OK for her to make her case. However, it is not OK for public school Boards or administrators to buy that line. It’s against the law. Then we have the infamous Daily Review columnist David Mokto weighing in to support the Power Team. If nothing else should worry the promoters of the Power Team, having support from The Daily Review’s Troll of Intolerance should be giving them a queasy feeling in their stomachs. One letter writer offered his take that I, or others, who oppose the Power Team program are anti-Christian. We disagree. We would react the same way if the Power Team were a group of evangelical Moslems, Hindus, Jews, or Mormons, for examples, attempting to gain access to a captive audience of children. I can just hear the cries of outrage from the Power Team supporters if a Hindu group ran an evangelical program in local schools. Another writer appealed to the public on behalf of the PowerTeam organizers by arguing that all those who opposed the Power Team are insensitive to the problems facing our youth. Nothing is further from the truth. Many of those involved in objecting to the Power Team are among the most active people in our county in programs that support children. Their involvements include youth sports, PTG programs, in-school volunteers, reading assistants, tutors, judges in school forensic competitions, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, Scouting, ending corporal punishment in public schools, and youth programs in Churches to name a few. What the opponents of the Power Team understand is how important it is to not bring into public schools programs that will become a religious battle ground. Furthermore, we understand that by giving favor to a particular religious perspective in public school, by allowing a Power Team to witness, advertize their evening program during a school assembly, the Power Team seeks to legitimize of their religious beliefs by association with the public schools. Conducting evangelical program during in-school assemblies gives their message the appearance of an ipso-facto endorsement by our government. People who object to the Power Team understand that it was wrong for the administrators of our Towanda public schools to look the other way several years ago when a former basketball coach routinely held locker room prayer sessions. One letter justified the Power Team program because others like it had been permitted. The ramifications of these past events are reason enough supporting the Towanda School Boards decision not to have the Power Team. In every case I am familiar with, complaints were lodged, and commitments were made by the schools administrators to not make the mistake again. In each case, promises were made to the administration to avoid entanglement of church and state, and in each case the administration was deceived. It happened in Towanda as I explained, it happened in Athens with the Athletes in Action program of the Campus Crusade for Christ, and it happened in North East Bradford schools when they had the One Man Volleyball Team religious crusade. In each case many parents who learned about the evangelical content of the programs were angry, as they should have been. So, where do we go from here? Well, we can hope, that after all of the promises that the organizers of the Power Team program have made, the Power Team will not use their appearance in other area schools to promote their evening programs. We can hope that they will follow the spirit of their promises and not distribute their religious literature to children before, during or after the in-school programs on school property. We can hope they keep their commitment not to endorse or have a representative endorse the Power Team’s evening evangelization programs during the in school program. To do anything less will diminish the credibility of the local spokespersons and organizers of the Power Team visit. We can also hope the program(s) that are allowed during school are more than entertaining, and they actually help more children than they harm. I know there are better, more focused anti-drug programs that do not blur the lines between church and state are available. I am saddened that because of the bully tactics of The Daily Review and the promoters of the Power Team these other programs will probably not be presented in our schools. Why? Since student instructional time and funds available for assemblies are limited, I doubt that focused, quality programs will get the chance to be presented this year in many area schools. There is time for the administrators of the local schools to do what is right, to disallow the Power Team. After hearing all the diatribes by the Power Team supporters and listening to their rants during personal phone calls, I am more convinced than ever that the Power Team was never about education; it is about preaching to our children by a group focused on conversion of our families to their faith. The silent majority is made up of those who understand the value of a truly secular school system for all. The silent majority understands you do not indoctrinate, or give groups access to advertise to the children of another family in our public school. We, as neighbors, with very different religious, social, economic, cultural, and historical perspectives, have very similar goals and hopes for our children, and the children of our neighbors. This is our common ground which lets us co-exist. Yours, |
| | March 11, 2001 RE: Police Chief Hostettler’s professional advice. Dear Editor, Putting aside Police Chief Hostettler’s gratuitous, but certainly professional, name calling in his March 11th letter in The Daily Review, I do get nervous when a law enforcement professional displays such a tenuous grasp of the Constitution of the United States. For example, Police Chief Hostettler wants to ignore the meaning of the First Amendment’s separation of church and state clause and fall back on what the “founding fathers” intended. He does this because he finds it inconvenient to explain away the last 61 years of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions on the First Amendment. But lets accept his perspective about what the founding fathers intended. One would think that, “a thorough and complete examination of the founding fathers’ views,” as asserted by Police Chief Hostettler, would show that when the founding fathers wrote in the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal,” they meant “all men are created equal.” But they didn’t. It took until 1865 to free the slaves, 1920 before women got the vote, and 1940 before the Supreme Court decided that the First Amendment really did apply to all our citizens. If, as Police Chief Hostettler asserts, this “learned group of men [the founding fathers] understood the need for society to have a solid spiritual, moral, and ethical base to survive and prosper,” why is it that they left any reference to God out of the Constitution? Did they just.... forget? Or, could it be that the founding fathers understood better than Police Chief Hostettler that a people and individuals can, “have a solid spiritual, moral, and ethical base,” without Police Chief Hostettler’s religious perspective. Perhaps the founding fathers felt no need to shove their particular religion down everyone else’s throat However, I am sure the founding fathers understood very well that our citizens did not want the government of the United States forcing government-sponsored religious instructions on their children or their children’s children. Lets look at this Power Team issue another way. Police Chief Hostettler presents himself as a professional law enforcement officer. If a person has violated the law repeatedly after promising Police Chief Hostettler to go straight, are we to assume the Chief of Poice Hostettler will say, “I trust you, don’t worry I won’t check up on you.” Maybe that is what he does but some of us don’t do that. We have been there, seen that about evangelical in-school programs in Bradford County. As Jeff Gonzalez reports [** in his letter written 3/9/01 ** (see note below)], “The Athletes in Action also had promised not to promote their religious faith or recruit students to evening evangelical programs. Despite these assurances, the Athletes in Action broke their promise. Before we experienced the dishonest, bait and switch tactics of the Athletes in Action, Towanda School District had other similar programs. After one such program several years ago, then Towanda Superintendent Betty Cox assured me it will not happen again. Later it was then Superintendent Daniel Paul who assured me that the district’s administrators were assured no witnessing or proselytization would occur. They too were sorry and that it won't happen again. Now we have the Power Team. Their supporters also are promising there will be no proselytizing.” Excuse me but I see a pattern here. But apparently I am missing the point here. After all, as Police Chief Hostettler asks in his letter, “You want a professional opinion, Mr. Moeller, I’ll give you one, “the message of the Power Team brings is one that is very much needed.” And that is, - - and I quote, "To be a ministry of excellence and integrity with our heartbeat and focus on winning the lost, building the local church, and encouraging the pastor." (Power Team’s mission statement). So, what we have here is a local Police Chief, who writes as the Police Chief and who trots out his professional credentials to support his authority, promoting a religious program for in-school assemblies in the United States. This raises some serious Constitutional questions. Just what does Police Chief Hostsettler think the appropriate role of police is in our society? Does anyone else get the feeling that there something seriously out of whack in Troy, Pennsylvania? Yours truly,
|
| |
February 9, 2002 To the editor: I cannot believe that the Daily Review publishes such tripe as is produced by David Motko. His attacks on the Abuse and Rape Crisis Center, The Bradford County Regional Arts Council, Brooks Eldredge-Martin, Tina Pickett and others far too numerous to mention are disgusting. People should direct their attention to the Pennsylvania Alliance for Democracy web site, http://www.bc-alliance.org/, for a complete review of the unethical practices of the Daily Review and the credentials that David Motko claims support his writings. Andrew B. Duvall III
|