Sounding off: Rights, freedoms and masks

Much has been expressed recently concerning freedoms and rights, especially regarding masks. From my perspective, public safety concerns during an epidemic/pandemic will always trump individual freedoms and rights to the degree of the lethality of the epidemic/pandemic.

The 1918 Spanish flu pandemic killed up to 675,000 people in a U.S. population of about 100 million over a two-year period. Translating to today’s population, a similar outbreak could result in up to 2 million deaths. A typical flu season results in an average of 37,000 flu-related deaths. We have come to accept flu-related deaths as a “cost of doing business” — that is, no special precautions need to be taken.

As of this writing, U.S. covid-19 deaths are reported as 191,000, equivalent to five flu seasons. We are only six months out from the initial outbreak, so the pandemic has a long way to run and may be a 10-flu season event (370,000 deaths). By comparison, the 1918 pandemic equated to a 50-plus flu season event.

If we were facing that kind of lethality, discussions of “freedoms and rights” would be curtailed, I am sure. Thus, the question remains: What degree of covid-19 lethality would trigger “refuseniks” (champions of “freedoms and rights”) into accepting broad public safety measures — a 20-flu season event? A 30-flu season event?

It is only a matter of degree that dictates observing public safety guidelines, not whether there is an absolute “right or freedom” to ignore them.

James Kvitkovich, Hempfield

Mistake to remove Confederate monuments

There is a disturbing attempt by some to erase our history. Unfortunately, members of our Congress are now included in that group, with the introduction of House Resolution 7608 sponsored by Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y. Buried in the bill is the following provision: “the National Park Service shall remove from display all physical Confederate commemorative works, such as statues, monuments, sculptures, memorials, and plaques … .”

Their removal would be a great mistake. These are not simply blocks of granite or marble, or bronze plaques; they represent a turning point for our country, and for the many thousands who annually visit our national parks and museums, they are a link to our heritage. For many, they are a tangible realization of history lessons that were taught to us years ago, and for some, they may be the only history lesson they will ever receive.

Our history is more important than ever. It is the foundation of what we believe in, what we fight for and what many have died for.

HR 7608 will now go to the Senate for passage. The inclusion of this provision in the bill, if passed, would result in a great loss, not only of links to our national heritage, but the opportunity for future generations to learn and more fully understand events that helped shape our great country’s future.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

James Yex, Turtle Creek

Kneeling athletes acknowledge struggle

Regarding the letter “Athletes disrespecting our flag, country”: Often when a professional athlete kneels during the national anthem, somebody somewhere begins to feel distressed. This person buys the story he or she was fed that this is “disrespecting” the flag and that the professional should “just play the game.” That person often says that this is an insult to our veterans, who served to defend the Constitution — which protects the right to free speech such as kneeling. And whenever freedom of speech takes more direct routes (like the nationwide protests this summer), the individual is sold the narrative that the protesters should demonstrate more peacefully (statistics show that 93% of the protests have been completely peaceful).

But why should athletes be forced to stand and show unquestionable reverence for a flag that doesn’t necessarily show that respect to many, especially the Black/brown communities? This nation has not done the work needed for true reconciliation, nor has it repaired the systemically racist institutions that permeate our culture. Major athletes recognize their privilege, and they choose to use their platform to promote a message of growth and healing by acknowledging the ongoing struggle.

America is a beautiful and incredible nation, but the citizenry needs to recognize that there are serious problems here. We have massive racial tensions, an ongoing pandemic, a startling recession, and many other issues. An athlete kneeling is nowhere near as serious as those points. My advice to those who are grumpy about an athlete kneeling: maybe just watch the game.

Broderick S. Gerano, Apollo

Wedge issue voting results in poor representation

Pro-life means saving all life. Pro-life means saving the unborn, helping the poor, and supporting immigration and human rights, the disabled and elderly rights and being against war and the death penalty.

The pastor often fails to tell the congregation the complete pro-life doctrines of the church, and so many think saving the unborn is the only doctrine. That leads them into being right-wing Christian voters with only that part of the doctrine told to them. You simply can’t tell me that you save babies and in the next breath call an unwed mother with a low-paying job who uses programs such as welfare a socialist.

I get tired of the wedge issues of pro-life against pro-choice and guns and their so-called better morals and values the right wing tries to flaunt. In 2016, President Trump was going to open steel mills and coal mines, and that didn’t work out, so in 2020 he is saving the policemen while they falsely say Democrats hate the police and support riots. That is why we get poor representation as a majority vote on wedge issues instead of discussing the candidates’ intelligence and abilities to lead all the people and be a president to all.

Wedge issues are not going to change, but poor leadership will continue voting on wedge issues.

Carol Badgley, Bovard

Police are not the bad guys

Recently, Pittsburgh police asked the leader of a “peaceful” protest several times to move a line of bicycles that was obstructing traffic flow at a busy intersection on a day when University of Pittsburgh students were moving back to campus in Oakland (“ ‘Low profile’ arrest creates firestorm as officials, experts blast Pittsburgh police tactic”). The 24-year-old protest leader, Matthew Cartier, refused, saying he “doesn’t listen to police.”

To avoid a scene that could escalate into a non-peaceful confrontation, the police used a “low-visibility arrest” technique to charge him with disorderly conduct, failure to disperse and obstructing the roadway.

Nine out of 10 people would likely say the Pittsburgh police handled this wisely. Not the police’s boss. Mayor Bill Peduto ripped the police for using an unmarked vehicle to aid the arrest. District Attorney Stephen Zappala and several city council members piled on; one likened the arrest to a hostile abduction.

Ironically, the good guys, the police, become the bad guys for doing their job while the lawbreaker is pitied because he was arrested “the wrong way.” Really?

Our police are good people. They do a very difficult job, yet they are continuously demonized by protesters, many political office holders and candidates, professional athletes and entertainers. The police deserve better.

Scott Brown, Greensburg

A simple solution for in-person voting

So with all of this political crap going on about mail-in voting, why isn’t a simple solution being considered? Why can’t we vote over a three- or four-day period? In these pandemic times, if we can spread out schooling and other things in a hybrid mode, why not voting? A-F go on Saturday or Sunday, G-O on Monday and P-Z on Tuesday, or whatever works in various areas.

Joe Kujawski, Buffalo Township

‘Defunding police’ is a misnomer

“Defunding the police” is an unfortunate misnomer, developed from many irate protesters. It is, of course, an impossibility in a society consisting of beings who are human and faulted, and has conjured up visions of total anarchy. This is a phrase used politically as a scare tactic, and is apparently working.

The phrase supports divesting some funds from departments and reallocating them to non-force forms of community support, such as youth services, education, health care and others. It does not mean police would be disbanded.

There are situations that can be approached by professionals more trained in psychiatric study than a police officer. Defunding reduces the “force” portion of the department and uses people trained in psychiatric services as the first responders. Defusing situations by those trained in critical thinking and an understanding of human behavioral patterns, as opposed to issuing perpetrators ultimatums, should better establish relations.

An experienced leader can quickly analyze everything and decide which is the better option; police with force would be right behind if needed. Supposedly, changing to this system is under way in Kentucky and in the Northwest. It should lead to society “cleaning house” of undesirables in places of power.

Gerald Torbert, Hempfield