Opinions

Last week, the Clarendon Board of Aldermen addressed the religious billboards and staggering number of sewer-pipe crosses – sort of, that is. Alderman Sandy Skelton brought the issue up of regulating signs. We have an ordinance. However, that was about it as far as it went.

A passing reference was made that perhaps it might be a good thing if the city council looked into the matter further, perhaps in a future meeting. I get the feeling that this council would just as soon leave this issue alone, until it festers to the point where serious disagreement blossoms, things get out of hand, and the sheriff has to intervene. I think that they are kicking the can down the road hoping the issue will go away. It ain’t gonna happen, unfortunately. This issue needs to be addressed and resolved.

At the moment, no one seems what can or cannot be done to address this problem. A few people (mainly those putting the infernal things up) like the signs and crosses, while many others don’t like them and think that they demean the City of Clarendon. I’m in the second group.

I think the signs and sewer-pipe crosses are cheap, trashy, and embarrassing to the community. Most cities, as a matter of course, do beautification projects in order to put their best foot forward, so visitors to that city will remember how beautiful and inviting the city is, want to come back, and maybe start a business. You know, grow. Some people, on the other hand, seem determined to clutter our town with cheap symbols of their faith, which do not necessarily agree with other expressions of the Christian faith.

For example, when entering Clarendon, folks see a billboard exclaiming, “Clarendon, Texas, Believers in the Cross and Jesus Crucified.” Well, this may be true for some people, but it is certainly not true for me and I don’t appreciate anyone else presuming to speak for my beliefs. I believe in the Risen Christ, not the cross, an instrument of death! Does this signage speak for the entire town? Is this our new town motto? Who decided that this message accurately reflects the sentiments of the majority of the citizens of Clarendon? Actually, I’m appalled that people see this message coming into town and then have to read it again when leaving town.

Another sign proclaims, “911 Tragedy Worse Things Coming Find Jesus.” Really? Are we stooping so low as to use the tragic deaths of thousands of Americans to sell how religious we are? 9-11 was not only a tragedy; 9-11 was an act of war! How can we be so callous as to use such a horrific event to sell our particular brand of righteousness? Furthermore, who says worse things are coming? Who approved this message for the town?

I realize that these signs and crosses are very important to some people’s feelings and beliefs. Naturally, they are going to be sensitive about any criticism of them. I also realize that the people who are putting these signs up may not have the deepest pockets in town, and therefore have to use cheap, ugly materials instead of high quality materials that actually enhance the town’s beauty. Their message seems to be more important that getting it across with dignity and class.

Coming into town from the north on Hwy. 70, a billboard proclaims, “Lovers of Pleasure More than God?” Hmmm? What does this mean? Are pleasures and God mutually exclusive? What are people to think when they drive by such a bizarre billboard? Is the sign directed to the patrons of a certain business located just east of Howardwick? Perhaps visitors will think we are accusing them of loving pleasures more than God. Does it mean that there are no pleasures to be found in Clarendon?

My point is that these signs are not only tacky and trashy, the messages they proclaim may or may not be true, and are certainly open to debate. Of course, they are constitutionally protected by freedom of speech and freedom of religion clauses, but being constitutional does not necessarily mean that they put our best foot forward. Ugly is still ugly.

There are, of course, other meanings to the cross.

Perhaps we should rename our portion of Hwy. 287 to the Appian Way. In 73 B.C., a former slave and gladiator, the famous Spartacus, led a rebellion of escaped slaves against the Roman Republic. A prominent senator, Marcus Licinius Crassus, raised an army at his own expense, became their general, and two years later led them into battle and crushed Spartacus and his slave rebellion. Crassus was the wealthiest man in the Roman Empire. Fabulously wealthy. Crassus was wealthier than any of the Roman emperors, Egyptian pharaohs or European kings. Of course Crassus’s wealth was built on the backs of slaves, and thus his motivation to crush Spartacus and the slave rebellion.

After Crassus defeated Spartacus the senator was given a triumph on the Appian Way — the Roman victory parade. The road was lined with 6,000 crosses! Upon each cross was a crucified slave. The message was clear: This was how Rome dealt with threats to their interests. This event, as much as any, established crucifixion as the symbol of Roman ruthlessness when it came to suppressing their enemies.

Goodbye, Rome. Hello, Clarendon! What are our crosses really saying to our visitors about us?

I love Jesus for many reasons, one of which happens to be beer.

In terms of food and drink, I think alcoholic beverages are among the greatest blessings we have received from our Creator. Aside from the variety of great flavors and the relaxing effects of alcohol (in moderation of course), alcoholic beverages have played a crucial role throughout history in preserving the lives of many people during times when purified water was not available.

I am also committed to following the Scriptures, so much so that I spent over four years receiving a theological education. In all of my many hours of scouring the Scriptures and learning from some of the greatest minds in the Church, never have I come across anything that would intimate that alcohol is a bad.

Yet, as I have kept in touch with my home town through friends, family, and the news, I have come to the conclusion that the many churches in Clarendon seem to think alcohol is evil, along with those who consume it. Why else would churches support an arbitrary zoning law that would keep the sale of alcohol at least 300 feet away? To keep the “sinners” away? Or are the churches so weak that the mere sight of alcohol sales will lead them into drunkenness?

It must be made clear that there is no biblical justification for thinking alcohol or the consumption of alcohol is evil. To make such a claim would be to condemn Christ as a sinner, for he not only consumed wine on many occasions, but made his own, which happened to be high quality (i.e. the good stuff) in a display of his glory. Moreover, an abundance of wine is a sign of God’s blessing.

Instead of condemning what Christ would condone, let us say along with the great church leader Martin Luther, “Whoever drinks beer, he is quick to sleep; whoever sleeps long, does not sin; whoever does not sin, enters Heaven! Thus, let us drink beer.”

Devin Noble, Canyon

A couple of weeks ago, when the news that star football running back, Adrian Peterson, had been charged with child abuse, for spanking his son with a “switch,” I immediately thought about how absurd it was to charge a parent with such a serious crime just for spanking his son. During discussions with friends about the incident, I took the position that the lack of spanking was the cause for a lot of society’s ills today. My friends and I bemoaned the fact that it is inappropriate for the state to intervene in family matters, especially in this case, since Adrian Peterson was such a fine, upstanding man and a great example for today’s youth.

We chatted about how we were spanked, when needed, as children. I recalled the time that I received three spanking from three different members of my family (uncle, grandmother, and mother) for the same offense – theft of a candy bar from Clifford’s grocery store. I felt that it was terribly unjust to be spanked three times for the same offense. Of course, the first two spankings were mild, a couple of swats on the behind. My third spanking, however, was different – because Mom did the spanking. She may have weighed 100 pounds after a feast, and stood about five feet tall in heels. Even though she was no bigger than a minute, that woman could pack a punch, especially with a switch. Mother nearly always left welts on our naked hamstrings, after making us take down our jeans; and she spanked us with love and great purpose. Ouch!

I still take pride in the fact that I am the only grandchild that my grandfather, Leonard Putman, spanked. I deserved the spanking mainly because I snuck up on him and bit him on the back of his leg while he was enjoying the sweet, cool evening in his favorite lawn chair. I had taken exception to his admonition to leave Mam-ma’s flowers alone, lest she become riled and spank my little behind. His spanking, if it could be called that, amounted to a few swats on my behind with his bare hand.

I can say that I never had a spanking that I didn’t deserve. Who knows, they may have even helped to mold my character? I did learn early on that crime does not pay, and that it is not a good idea to bite your grandfather, or anyone else for that matter. I fervently hope that my children can say the same thing about the spankings I administered to them. I never left marks (I hope), but they knew that they had been spanked.

Regarding Adrian Peterson, I felt that he was probably of a similar mind about spanking when I first read of the charges against him. Then I saw the photos of his little four year old son. Spanking, regardless of the severity of the behavior that led to the spanking, should never, ever, draw blood and leave horrible bruises. They also should not be administered to the genitals, which was the case with his son. Adrian Peterson horribly abused his son. There is no doubt about that. What he did was inexcusable and he needs to be severely punished for his crime. He deserves to spend many years in prison contemplating the horrible things he did to his little son. The reason he gave for whipping his son was because the boy had pushed a sibling during a childish disagreement over a videogame.

Chance Jones, who was the same age as Adrian Peterson’s son when he was beaten to death by his father, Robert Babcock, probably had a similar experience to Peterson’s son in the beginning of his abusive treatment. Chance’s grandmother knew that horrible abuse was being rained down upon her grandson’s little body, yet remained quiet about the abuse.

Adrian Peterson is not much better than Robert Babcock. The biggest difference seems to be that someone stepped in to protect Adrian Peterson’s son before he was beaten to death. Chance Jones didn’t get that opportunity. Instead, he lies cold in his little grave, a testament to the fact that we must intervene when we witness child abuse in any form, regardless of how serious we think the abuse may be. All child abuse is deadly serious and must be stopped as soon as it comes to light.

Additionally, it has recently been noted that many of our professional athletes commonly abuse their spouses and girlfriends. Ray Rice brutally hit his girlfriend, now his wife, with a wicked left hook that knocked her several feet into the air and into the hand rail of an elevator. She was knocked completely out and it took several minutes before she regained consciousness. Yet, she married the man. I’m not sure what to think about that.

Another player with the Arizona Cardinals head butted his wife and broke her nose because she was not in the mood for love. The next day, he slugged her with a closed fist, adding insult to serious injury. This type of abuse has been going on for years, yet little is done about it. It’s not just professional athletes that do these horrible things; everyday people also are guilty of these abuses.

Physically, mentally, and sexually abusing women and children, regardless of the circumstances, are inexcusable and must be dealt with by society in a stern and harsh manner. Prison time needs to be mandatory in every case.

As you all may well know, a monument suddenly appeared in front of the Donley County Courthouse Annex a couple of weeks ago. Most folks knew it was coming, so it’s not a great surprise. On it, many statements were attributed to several Founding Fathers, along with others, including the Ten Commandments. Anyway, with all the engraving that was done on the monument I wonder if it is, in effect, a graven image? Just kidding – well, sort of.

Even though the monument is a weighty thing, I wonder what the point of it is. What is its purpose? What are the people behind the monument trying to say? For example, the monument includes statements attributed to George Washington, James Madison, John Jay, and alas, Patrick Henry, among others. Why, “alas” Patrick Henry? Because the monument uses a bogus quote attributed to Patrick Henry, in a 1956 magazine article. The quote is as follows, “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!”

Several respectable sources dispute that Patrick Henry actually wrote or said this. Unfortunately, according to the Huffington Post, “the quotation still appears regularly in Facebook and Twitter posts, and, remarkably, in presidential aspirant Newt Gingrich’s 2011 book, A Nation Like No Other (p. 76). And this from the only candidate with a history Ph.D.!”

“It is what it is, a totally inaccurate statement,” according to my publisher Roger Estlack. It is puzzling as to why the quotes on the monument were not properly vetted. Actually, it is highly embarrassing that a false quote is now forever memorialized in front of the Courthouse Annex. We may have a possible $20,000 “oops” setting in our front yard.

There is also a misspelling or misuse of a word included in the history of Clarendon at the back of the monument. The history reads, “…purchased large tracks of land…” Actually, it should read, “…purchased large tracts of land…” Of course, they could have been referring to dinosaur, train, or animal tracks that can be found in the neighborhood. The monument also mistakenly uses the word “purposed” instead of “proposed.”

Finally, I get the feeling that the people who placed this monument may have intended it to suggest that our nation was founded on Christian values. If so, nothing could be farther from the truth. While many of the Founding Fathers were Christians, the Constitution and structure of the country were based strictly upon Enlightenment principles.

Most Americans seem to be under the erroneous idea that the Founding Fathers were pious, prayerful men. That is not the case. They were skeptical men of the Enlightenment who questioned each and every idea that they were taught. They were very well read in political philosophy and science, and were well versed in theological matters. They continually challenged the religious teachings they heard, both publicly and privately.

For example, Thomas Jefferson counseled his nephew to subject the authors of the New Testament to the same textual scrutiny he would give to other ancient historians like Tacitus or Livy, and to treat the supposed biblical miracles with suspicion. Jefferson himself edited a version of the New Testament that left out every miraculous and supernatural event, leaving only Jesus’ moral teachings.

George Washington, on the other hand, rewrote the presidential addresses crafted for him by his speechwriters so as to omit all references to Jesus Christ. And James Madison, who was quoted on the monument, gave his opinion that, “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded subject.”

The era of the Founding Fathers was not an age of faith but an age of science and skepticism, and the Founding Fathers were in the lead. The American Revolution, and the subsequent founding of the United States of America, embodied the Enlightenment values that had been formulated over the previous hundred years or so. Our American experiment was originally an Enlightenment experiment.

I think the monument would be better placed in front of a church or even on private property. It has no place in front of our magnificent courthouse, a true monument to local government, and a temple of justice. I agree with Jefferson and the Founding Fathers that there must always be a wall separating church and state. The mystery monument is located in the wrong place, for the wrong reasons.

This is in response to the Editor’s Commentary a couple of weeks ago in The Clarendon Enterprise regarding school days and how they have changed. I would like to acknowledge that the editor is right and things have changed, some for the better, some for the worse. Our world is not the same. Our school and the newspaper is not the same as they were in 70s either, and I doubt either one wants to go back to the “old ways” of business.

In my opinion, when we talk about our school or school in general as parents, grandparents, and educators, it’s our duty to accentuate the positive. I think it’s safe to say that our kids’ opinions about school, teachers, rules, the AR program, homework, etc., are formed from hearing our opinions verbalized. Just because we as adults might not agree with every detail at the school doesn’t mean we should discuss it in a manner where the kids could take it as, “Hey, my parents are upset with the school,” when it’s usually just what I call “innocent griping,” which we all do. And I’m not implying in any way that you, Roger, would ever mention that the AR program at school was “stupid” in front of your kids. I’m just saying that even when we don’t happen to verbalize that we have a problem with something, our kids pick up on our tone, body language, etc. And if anyone reading this is going to be a parent of a first grader this school year, take note: it is “not required” for your child to take a book home at night for AR. Their reading and testing are done during the school day.

No, our school is not perfect. No school is. But the positive far outweighs the negative at Clarendon CISD. I believe we have a wonderful school system, and there are great things going on at every level. I just happen to know more about what all they do in my granddaughter’s class. There is a lot of paperwork going, but the students do still have to learn to add, subtract, write, and spell, etc. And as in the 70s, I believe that the best way, still today, is by repetition and on paper. But there were so many wonderful experiences for our children last year. They put on a puppet show, cooked Green Eggs and Ham, hatched baby chicks, cared for a baby tarantula, observed various spiders in their classrooms, and made apple pies and popcorn balls all in conjunction with a classroom lesson on various subjects. The kids also presented a great Veterans Day program. Plus so much more.

Another positive at our school is technology. I think Clarendon CISD is doing a great job preparing our kids in this area. Anyone who would like to take a closer look at what our school has to offer in this area I’m sure they’d love to show it off. I think the teachers, administrators, and support staff our school has are, hands down, better than any school around and the quality of education is top notch. So before anyone complains about buying school supplies or not being provided free pre-Kindergarten, neither of which the school is required to do, go check out what kind of programs, teachers, and facilities your children do have here, and then feel free to tell anyone that will listen how good we’ve got it!

Now, if you had some great teachers at Clarendon CISD, like I did, please feel free to tell them you appreciated them, such as Sam Lowry, Jean Stavenhagen, Helen Land, Coach Jack Hall, Johnny Leathers, Bob Howell, Carrie Howell, Jeff Walker, Kay Hayes, Bobbie Thornberry, and many more.

Reneé Mott, Clarendon

A sure sign that the rapture is near is when I find some occasional common ground with Fabulous Fred. More likely is that I am losing my rather tenuous grip on sanity. In his Killer Weed commentary I found some spotty agreement which is generally cause for rethinking my position. In discussions of drugs, I paint with a broad brush by including alcohol and nicotine in the genre.

I believe it is true that casual and infrequent use of marijuana is not a significant health risk for the two people in the world that are causal and infrequent users. The problem is that none of my junkie friends ever saved anything for later and smoke all they could get their hands on as quickly as they could. So the casual user concept is moot, and there are a fair number of lung and other health issues as well as societal problems associated with chronic use. They will spend every cent they can earn, beg, borrow, or steal on the drug to the exclusion of bathing, shaving, washing clothes, rent, or dental bills, which suggests it is not an innocuous recreational drug. In truth, there are no innocuous drugs.

Prohibition should have shown us what happens when Congress creates a situation where really bad people get really rich and powerful (comments on Congress will come at a later date). I do not think that there are any easy solutions to our drug use. The current system of largely unsuccessful attempts at interdiction have created a situation where the profits of transport and delivery of drugs are so large that there are ten people fighting to take the place of every one that was caught. Only Kamikaze pilots and suicide bombers are harder to control.

I do want to suggest a simple idea for changing the status quo. Simple does not mean easy, just uncomplicated. We, as a nation, should put the problems associated with using drugs back on the user. Receiving public assistance at any level will require passing random and frequent drug tests. Not just for Mom, but for the whole family. One fails and they all fail. Hopefully a good buzz will not be worth being cold, hungry, and living under a bridge. Junkies are always getting hurt and are the trial bars’ best repeat customers. So if you get drunk, drive, and hit a tree, you can no longer blame the tree or its owner. Prove up clean and sober at the hospital or “Torts ‘R’ Us” is out of luck. Plus, ERs will no longer be forced to give free care to overloaded junkies. Too harsh? What we are doing now is not working and the floor is open for suggestions because there is a problem and it is not going to cure itself.

Richard Sheppard, DDS, Clarendon