The controversy over whether 14-year-olds should serve prison sentences seems misdirected. It is as if the age of a person is the most important issue, rather than the ability to house them or the appropriateness of prison over juvenile detention.
Age is not main issue
in trials of minors
If juvenile detention serves only as a holding place for these 14-year-olds, and prison provides a more appropriate program for rehabilitation, then I can see discussing this.
However, this brings up other issues -- like restructuring housing in prison to accommodate children of such a young age, and adjusting rehabilitation programs to make it serviceable for minors.
It seems that rethinking the purpose of juvenile detention and prison is what we need to consider first. Then it would not be such a controversy as to where to send a 14-year-old.
No money! No jobs! Poor economy! Cut the budget! These are the headlines today. These were the same headlines echoed in Hawaii about a century ago. It prompted the overthrow of the monarchy.
Prince Kuhio deserves
to be sincerely honored
One man did something about it: Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalanianaole stabilized and served Hawaii. He established the Hawaiian Home Lands, is the father of tourism, developed Pearl Harbor and the other military facilities, guided Hawaii through the Spanish-American War and World War I, planned for statehood, and did much more.
A grateful territory mourned and established Kuhio Day in honor of him. Yet we hardly observe it today.
Like the great "Boat Days" of yesteryear, when the entire town and island greeted the ship, we need to work together. One way is to really observe Kuhio Day.
We work at Aloha Week in the fall. We are trying to observe Kamehameha Day in the summer. Why not build up Kuhio Day for the spring?
Charles V. Naumu
The Communists have taken over Hawaii's judiciary. We are no longer a part of the United States when we allow judges to interpret "non-votes."
Supreme Court justices
make appalling decision
Since when does an official majority, which votes "yes" on having a constitutional convention, suddenly become a majority "no" vote -- because the Supreme Court justices say people who didn't punch the ballot meant to say "no"?
There was a choice, yes or no. If the ballot wasn't marked, it cannot count either way.
Where but in a Communist country can you have the outcome of an official vote changed because you have five arrogant, union-swayed judges choosing to interpret unmarked ballots?
Our legal votes will never mean anything unless we get rid of these extreme liberal judges who go against the will of the people.
Donna L. Davis-Brown
The perpetuation of hate and prejudice against gays and lesbians by the majority of our legislators and churches is frightening. The government and the church are supposed to lead the fight for equal rights for all people.
are supposed to protect rights
Would they have been for segregation or against "mixed" marriages? I think the parallel applies to those who rage on in ignorance against this minority.
I applaud those enlightened legislators and clergy who do the right thing to protect same-gender rights.
On March 14, the Star-Bulletin published a "news" article about the state's decision to hire Cooper & Carvin, a prominent law firm in Washington, D.C., to help with its appeal in the same-sex marriage case. There were a few points I would like to make:
Whole story wasn't told
about Cooper & Carvin
Dan Foley was quoted as saying, "In the past, the state has said it was going to take the high road in defending this case." Is the "high road" equated to an apathetic state attorney general and an easy win for Foley's clients?
The article described Matt Coles as "an attorney who worked against Colorado's Amendment 2," but didn't mention that he is the director of the National Lesbian and Gay Rights Project of the ACLU. Hardly a "neutral" source on the subject.
The article again failed to note that Cooper is one of the most prominent attorneys in Washington, D.C. His legal career has been dedicated to the support of democratic self-government.
We know that the Star-Bulletin supports same-sex marriage, and that Foley does not believe that Hawaii's people should be allowed to resolve the marriage issue for themselves. But the least your paper can do is give readers fair and complete information.
(Via the Internet)