Published 12:00 am Tuesday, July 17, 2007

‘House arrest’ won’t
solve support issues
Regarding Sunday’s article “Electronic house arrest for deadbeat parents”:
I was in child support court once (not as a defendant) when I heard a judge order a man to jail for not paying his child support. The man told the judge, “if you put me in jail I will not be able to pay my child support.” The judge responded “you haven’t been in jail and you still haven’t been paying your child support”! So off to jail the man went.
Lets first distinguish between a deadbeat parent and one who gets behind on their child support.
In my opinion, a deadbeat parent is someone who refuses to work in order to pay child support or just refuses to pay child support; they should go to jail, not the comforts of their home.
A person who falls behind in their child support payments through no fault of their own is not a deadbeat parent and should not be placed in jail or under electronic monitoring.
I am very curious to see what the qualifications are to sit in the comfort of your own home because you have been considered a “deadbeat parent.” I am curious to see what the cost of this program is, considering the Sheriff’s Office will be chasing down the ones that “miss curfew” or “fail in this program through some other means.”
I chuckled out loud when I read the statement from Child Support Supervisor Beth Berry, “When a person participates in this program, they seem to be more apt to go to work.” I have news for you, Ms. Berry. When a person knows they are going to jail for not paying child support and that in itself is not a big enough incentive to go to work, I do not think your program will change their minds, only prolong the inevitable.
ó Phillip Bradshaw
The man I know
Recently, I’m sure you have heard the story of Charles Pharr, a man whom a Rowan County sheriff’s deputy shot last Wednesday night while trying to serve a warrant on Mr. Pharr.
First of all, let me introduce myself. My name is Lauren Sechler, and I am Charles Pharr’s girlfriend. Recently, we were blessed with a baby girl who is now 5 months old. I have known Charles for the past four and a half years and I can pretty much say that I know him like the back of my hand. Friday, the Post described him as a dangerous man. I and many others would disagree. If anything, he is a gentle father who loves his daughter very much. He does many things for his family, including helping his grandparents and his mother as much as possible. Anyone who knows Charles personally would describe him as a very happy, laidback man who is constantly making people laugh and always has a smile on his face.
I remember when I was younger and I would wait on my father to get home from work every day. I would get so excited just seeing him, even though I had seen him that morning. My father was a very important part of my life, just as Charles is with our daughter. Please, don’t think of Charles as just a dangerous man or a criminal. Think of him as a father who has very many people who love him dearly and are supporting him completely. Please pray for my family in our time of need.
ó Lauren Sechler
China Grove
A slippery lineIn the July 16 letters from Tim Truemper and Mark Wilson, both failed to see the point made by Michael Rymer in that there are already laws on the books that protect people from abduction, murder, etc. The truth is, what happened in Sweden should not have been allowed to get that far and that interpretation was a problem. Mr. Truemper asserts that the Canadian law says it is only unlawful to incite violence against certain minorities, not speak out against them. Who is going to decide where the line is drawn between inciting violence and just speaking out against them?
Homosexual activists in Sweden still hope for an appeal to a higher court for a conviction of the preacher. Mr. Truemper cannot guarantee it will never be unlawful to speak against homosexuality with the politically correct society this has become. He is blinded to the fact that homosexuals want their lifestyle to be accepted by everyone. They will not stop until this is done and we all have a smile on our face.
Mr. Wilson doesn’t understand that Mr. Rymer never said anything about a hate-crime law ever being used to stifle free speech but rather he said it was not uncalled for to fear it one day because of further legislation and/or interpretation. Get it right, Mr. Wilson.
Bills like S. 1105 do not protect anybody. They make homosexuals feel good about getting some special recognition and open doors that we do not want open.
ó Glenda Barber
I am a senior citizen and have attended the new “Lunch & More” meal site all this past week at John Calvin Presbyterian Church across from the VA Hospital on Brenner Avenue.
I go about 10:30 a.m. each morning, and the fellowship is wonderful. Everyone is so nice, and (site manager) Sam Warlick makes everyone feel right at home.
This was really needed in this area. We seniors need a little extra attention sometimes, and a nutritious meal!
The real plus is that I haven’t had to cook all week!
Thanks to all involved.
ó Shirley Corriher
I really enjoyed the Monday article by Steve Huffman “We’re still old school,” about Buddy Barringer and his radiator business.
The photos by Jon C. Lakey pictured Buddy smoking while doing his hot and hard work.
Since smoking took away my dad when I was 11 years old, when I see someone smoking my heart is saddened. The childhood memories of my dad crying and begging for breath due to his emphysema are welded in my mind forever.
I hope that Buddy will consider flushing out his body from harmful tobacco.
ó Mike Sawyer
Birmingham, Ala.
Mike Sawyer is executive director of the anti-smoking group, I Will Never Use Tobacco, Inc.