Language should unify

Language should unify
EDITOR:
If there's one subject that America has always been equal about, it's language.
Whether the immigrants were Europeans, Asians, Africans, or South Americans was irrelevant. The bottom line was they had to learn English eventually. No group had amnesty from this stipulation.
There may be some who counter this by saying that Mexico had owned California and other territories out West, so that should give Spanish free reign as the other American language.
Well, going by this mentality, then what about the Native Americans? They certainly were here thousands of years prior to everyone. The ultimate "grandfather clause" would certainly go to them. In Ohio we would speak Iroquois; out west Apache; Lakota in the Dakotas, etc.
America has done more than its fair share of injustices, no question. But, bending the American language exclusively for Hispanic immigrants would be an injustice to all the prior immigrants who had to work very hard to learn English.
BOB LOCKIEC
Struthers
Issue 3 has serious flaws
EDITOR:
I am writing in response to the Oct. 15 letter to the editor entitled & quot;Hypocrites oppose Issue 3. & quot; The position taken by the Catholic Conference of Ohio to oppose Issue 3 was not arrived at lightly. The arguments in favor of, and in opposition to, this issue were carefully considered.
On the one hand, the Catholic Church does not view games of chance as inherently wrong, and it certainly would welcome additional support for higher education. However, the mechanism proposed in Issue 3 is judged to be flawed for several reasons.
Issue 3 would specifically allow up to 31,500 slot machines at predetermined locations. Slot machines can be highly addictive, and have the potential to entice gamblers to lose large amounts of money in a relatively short period of time. Owners will reap extensive monetary gain and will have a constitutionally protected monopoly in the state, while less than one-third of the derived profits will be used to fund limited numbers of scholarships.
We believe that whatever good might come from Issue 3 in the form of scholarships and jobs will be clearly outweighed by the serious social and economic consequences of addictive gambling behavior that will almost certainly be aggravated by its passage.
BRIAN R. CORBIN, Diocesan Director
Office of Social Action
Diocese of Youngstown
A councilman should know that schools benefit everyone
EDITOR:
I am writing in response to the comments reported in your paper regarding city council's vote for the school levy. I am a constituent of Mr. Pancoe. However, he never asked me about my feelings about the levy. Perhaps it is because he forgot he does not just represent the east side of Market Street.
I am for the levy and have a sign in my yard stating so. I am proud to do so.
Mr. Pancoe's statement about religion also reflects a lack of understanding regarding public schools. He should know it is against the law to practice any type of religion in public schools. He should do his homework.
It is also too bad that he will benefit from the building of a public school by a district he seems to have no respect for. Maybe he does not realize that one day those children he does not seem to believe deserve a decent education will also be voters. Presently, their parents are. Maybe he should rethink his statements regarding what all his constituents feel about the levy. It might be beneficial to check the west side of Market Street before he says he is speaking for me. This side of Market Street votes too. I regret that I voted for him. Trust me, that won't happen again.
I am also proud of our superintendent, our staff, our schools, and especially our children.
Vote yes for Youngstown schools.
ERNEST R. WHITE
Youngstown