Jesus would support policy

By: Letters To the editor | Winston-Salem Journal
Published: February 09, 2010

Scott Sexton's Feb. 2 column, "Money for prayer trials best spent elsewhere," was interesting and raised the question of "What would Jesus do?" in regard to the decision of whether Forsyth County should appeal the ruling of our county's prayer policy. Sexton makes the argument that Jesus would have preferred that the $100,000 already likely spent on the lawsuit be used for the neediest in our community. I respectfully disagree.

I do agree that more resources need to be spent on the poor; however the column fails to address the power of prayer and, in particular, the importance of praying for our political leaders when they are making crucial decisions for our community. The Old Testament gives many examples of the benefits of political decisions made in conjunction with God as opposed to political decisions made without God. Our community leaders have a huge responsibility in making decisions that affect all of us and it is my opinion that Jesus (WWJD) would support our current prayer policy before any political meeting.

Considering the impact that our political leaders have in the decisions that affect our lives, the value and the power of prayer is worth far more than the $100,000 spent in the case and is worth the financial risk to appeal it.

ROBBY EWING

Clemmons

Foxx and federal involvement

In her latest tirade ("Control of schools should be in local hands, not federal," Jan. 30) Rep. Virginia Foxx laments the federal government's involvement (read "money spent") on public education. Does she cite the highly successful Head Start program? No (although she has voted against it). Does she cite student-loan programs for our college-bound young people? No (although she has voted against them). Foxx cites the failed Bush policy, No Child Left Behind, where federal dollars are linked to the test results and now we "teach to the test."

This is the same former President Bush whom Foxx enthusiastically and unequivocally supported and promoted with her vote for the first 7.5 years he was in office. The last six months of his term, Foxx distanced herself as far as she could because she didn't want to be associated with his failing administration.

Now she wants to stop federal spending on education, and make this spending discretionary among the states. Such a plan would be a disaster. The only way to insure that all children benefit equally from these programs is to have federal funding. In addition, school districts depend on federal dollars to balance their already tight budgets. Under Foxx, is this to end?

It's sad that, as a former educator, Foxx still has a lot to learn.

TOM LANNO

Blowing Rock