The Oregonian Mandatory Injustice Florida leads the nation in locking up children in adult prison now it has put a 14-year-old boy away for life

Transcription

1 March 12, 2001 The Oregonian Mandatory Injustice Florida leads the nation in locking up children in adult prison now it has put a 14-year-old boy away for life Lionel Tate was 12 years old when he beat to death a 6-year-old playmate, Tiffany Eunick, and claimed that he was only imitating professional wrestlers he saw on TV. The 166-pound Tate stomped and battered Tiffany, who weighed 48 pounds, fracturing her skull. Florida Judge Joel Lazarus, correctly described Tate s behavior as cold, callous and indescribably cruel. It was a horrific crime, and yet similar words could also be used to describe the sentence that Judge Lazarus gave Tate last Friday life in an adult prison without possibility of parole. Almost no one involved in the case not the prosecutor, not defense attorneys, not even Tiffany s mother believes that Lionel Tate should spend the rest of his life in an adult prison for a crime that he committed when he was 12 years old. And yet, that s what is required under Florida s mandatory sentencing laws. People around the world seemed shocked by the news that the American justice system would sentence such a young boy to life in prison without possibility of parole. Amnesty International quickly joined the protest. William Schulz, Amnesty s American executive director, said that the fundamental principle at stake is that children are capable of change and growth, and should not be denied that opportunity. However, Tate is just the latest in a long line of youths in Florida and other states including Oregon to be sentenced as adults for crimes they committed as children. Tate is now the youngest of more than 450 inmates under 17 years old in Florida s adult prisons, according to The Miami Herald. Four of the inmates were, like Tate, 12 years old when they committed their crimes. Twenty-one were 13, and 91 were 14. Like many of these inmates, Lionel Tate doesn t belong in an adult prison. He belongs in the state s juvenile corrections system. Even the prosecutor in the case, Ken Padowitz, agrees with that assessment. Before the trial, Padowitz offered Tate s mother, Kathleen Grossett-Tate, and his attorney, a plea agreement that included three years in a juvenile prison, one year of house arrest and 10 years of probation. Tate s mother, who insisted that her son was not guilty of homicide, rejected the offer. Now all eyes will turn to Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who said Friday that he would consider a

2 clemency request. Bush has indicated that he, too, believes that Tate belongs in a juvenile facility. Padowitz, the prosecutor, said he would support the request for clemency and recommend that the governor order a lesser sentence for Tate. Maybe justice will be done in this case. Governors, however, are not elected to serve as backstops for inherently cruel and unjust mandatory sentencing laws. Florida and other states that have tied the hands of judges must give them back the discretion they need to administer justice. When a judge is confronted by a young offender, even a cold, callous and indescribably cruel boy like Lionel Tate, he should have more options than responding in kind. Pro and Con: Ten Commandments in Schools The Oregonian, April 14, 2001 Pro: Treat it like the important document it is to Americans Recent letters to the editor of The Oregonian regarding Senate Bill 746 the Ten Commandments bill are prime examples of the ignorance caused by the deprivation of the knowledge of our American heritage. The U.S. Constitution and Oregon Constitution provide freedom of worship and religious opinion not freedom from religion. So it s a fallacy to say that citizens should instill religious values only outside of public school classrooms. Nowhere in either the Oregon or U.S. Constitution does it prohibit the acknowledgement of God in public places. Such misinformation about the documents of our American law deludes our society, and the results have been disastrous. It was Karl Marx, the founder of socialism and communism, who once said, Take away the heritage of the people and they are easily persuaded. How long will we allow this thievery to continue? We must teach our children the truth. The U.S. House of Representatives voted to allow the Ten Commandments to be posted in schools and other governmental buildings when it approved an amendment to the juvenile crime bill. Rep. Robert Aderholt said the amendment was the first step for government in reinstilling the value of human life in children influenced by violent culture. Rep. Henry Hyde said the measure was designed to slow the flood of toxic waste into our kids minds. There is no legal ruling that displaying the Ten Commandments in a grouping of other historically significant documents is unconstitutional.

3 As Chief Justice William Rehnquist said, The Ten Commandments have had a significant impact on the development of the secular legal codes of the Western World. This valuable moral code should not be censored from schoolchildren. Our nations foundations are rooted in the Ten Commandments. Do not allow your family to be fooled by the profuse un- American propaganda that has robbed us of our heritage. Oregon can and should be a state that not only displays the Ten Commandments with other historically rich and significant documents, such as the Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights and the Justinian Code, but Oregon should also be willing to be the first to stand up for the right to do so. Contact your state senators and ask them to vote yes on Senate Bill 746. Suzanne Brownlow is state director of Concerned Women of America of Oregon Pro and Con: Ten Commandments in Schools The Oregonian, April 14, 2001 Con: A religious text shouldn t be lumped with secular ones As soon as you turn into the parking lot of my congregation, Neveh Shalom, you are confronted with an enormous representation of the Ten Commandments possibly the largest in the world. The Ten Commandments have long been a central symbol of Judaism. Whenever the Ten Commandments are read from the Torah during religious services, it is the universal Jewish custom for the entire congregation to stand as an indication of their centrality. Why is it, then, that the Jewish community is virtually unanimous in opposing legislation that would legalize the posting of the Ten Commandments in our public schools? Certainly we of all people embrace their values. In any moral society, these fundamental principles must be prized by every member of that society. And we take pride in having transmitted them to the world after they were given to the Jewish people on Mount Sinai. We oppose the posting of the Ten Commandments in our public schools because their source and their essence is religious in nature and not secular. As such they might warrant study when teaching a unit on the ancient Hebrews and Judaism, and might be compared and contrasted to other famous religious/moral teachings of Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha or Confucius. But they must not be equated with the Magna Carta or the Constitution, for these are landmark secular documents, testaments to human sensitivity and compassion, but not of divine origin. The Ten Commandments are the centerpiece of Israel s covenant with God. They cannot be ripped from their context: a just-liberated slave nation willingly and enthusiastically subjugating

4 itself to its God. To equate this monumental event with secular legal documents is to diminish their power and religious purpose. We teach our children that these Ten Commandments are the basis for the two most fundamental relations in a Jew s religious life the first five to God, the second to human relationships. Violating any is a violation against God. It is the place of the home and of religious institutions to teach these lessons. In addition, our public institutions must not make presumptions about anyone s religious beliefs and must respect the rites, texts and beliefs of all. It is important that we impart universal moral principles to our young people. The posting of the Ten Commandments is not the way to go about it. Daniel Issak is the rabbi at Congregation Neveh Shalom, Portland, OR. How to Read and Write an Editorial How to Read an Editorial The purpose of a news story is to inform you about a particular and noteworthy event. The purpose of an editorial may also be to inform, but its main objective is to persuade When you read an editorial, consider the following: 1. Examine the headline, sub-headline and related cartoon (if it exists). What will this editorial be about? What guesses or assumptions can you make about the author s perspective at this point? 2. Look at the author s name and affiliation, if given. What do you know about the author s background and/or potential bias at this point? 3. Read the first two to three paragraphs very carefully. What issue is the author discussing and what is his or her stance on this issue? 4. Once you have determined the author s stance on the issue, stop reading for a moment or two. What is the other side to the issue? Who might think differently? What are one or two reasons that you know that might support the other side of the author s stance? 5. Continue reading the editorial. What are two of the strongest pieces of evidence that the author uses to support his or her side of the issue? 6. Did the author persuade you? Did the author address the main objections of the opposition? Give an example. What did he or she not address? Why might the author have chosen not to address this element? Do you feel that the author was fair to the other side? Why or why not?

5 7. Go back through the editorial and circle words and phrases that are charged words. An author may use selected, charged words to characterize a person or a position harshly or unfairly. Words like commie, zealot, and extremist, among others, are charged words. How do these words affect your feelings about the issue? 8. If the author were standing right next to you now, what would you say to him or her? Use the questions on the previous page to guide your responses. Title Author Issue Question 1 Response

6 How to Read and Write an Editorial How to Write an Editorial Before You Write Brainstorm for topics: Choose topics in which you have a genuine interest and some prior knowledge. Be sure that they are issues that are debatable. Do not, for example, argue against school violence since no one in his or her right mind would ever be for such a thing. Research your topic: Ask opinions, conduct interviews, and locate facts. While editorials are opinion pieces, those opinions must still be supported with evidence. Get both sides: In addition to having support for your position, be certain that you have information about the other side of the issue. You will need this soon. Write a thesis: Before writing your draft, you must have a clearly stated position on this issue with a strongly worded reason for your position. Write out your topic sentences and/or main ideas:this preparation will help you organize your thoughts as you draft your editorial. Writing a Draft Get to the point: Your first paragraph should immediately bring the reader s attention to the seriousness of the issue. Look for the hook that will sell the piece to the reader: a current event or imminent danger, for example. You should then provide a concise summary of what you re going to tell the reader and include your thesis statement. Provide context: Give your readers important background information about the issue. This background should not be common knowledge (e.g., abortion is the termination of a pregnancy ), but should frame the issue and define any key terms that your reader will need in order to understand your argument. Make your point: Give your strongest two or three reasons why the reader should agree with you. Use relevant and appropriate evidence to support your reasons. Be sure to state the source of your information. Be sure that your argument is clear and organized.

7 Address your opposition: Reasonable people may think differently than you do on the subject. State at least one or two of the most credible reasons why someone might object to your point of view. Then explain why their reasons are wrong. Wrap it up: Briefly summarize the main points of your argument and think of a powerful way to end your piece. Often this means giving your reader one last thought to consider. Revising Your Draft Check your evidence: As you look back through your draft, consider whether you have included enough evidence to convince someone who thinks differently than you. Also, is that evidence relevant to your position? Check your organization: Can the reader follow your argument easily? Check your grammar: Nothing will make it easier for someone to dismiss your ideas than if you misspelled or misused words or phrases. Triple-check your editorial. Issue: Ten Commandments in School? Should the Ten Commandments be posted in public schools? Complete the following chart after you have read and analyzed the two editorials that address this question. Author Reasons For Reasons Against Strongest Statement of Position Suzanne Brownlow Daniel Issak You

8 A Person You Know