We encourage readers to submit letters to the editor on issues of interest to East Valley residents. Submissions should be no longer than 300 words, factually accurate and original thoughts of the writer. Please be brief and include name, address, city and phone number for verification. Letters and comments may be edited for clarity and length.
Don’t interfere with health care
I read with great sadness your article “Caregiver denied” (Friday, Tribune). I, too, live in Sunland Village, and as a past board member of the homeowners association, I cannot believe any board member or even any lawyer would take on the liability of becoming someone’s authority on whether their health dictated the need for a live-in caregiver. Health issues belong between individuals and their personal physician.
Even though I believe HOA documents must be followed, they do not dictate nor are they meant to tell how a person’s health issues are to be cared for. That is the role of an individual and their personal physician, not a board member or a lawyer — for neither are qualified to determine the degree of a person’s illness.
Thank you, Tribune, for bringing our attention to this matter.
Rules are still valid
Those homeowners association and “senior community” regulations were intentionally designed and written to give the builder perpetual control of the land and house that you paid for. Unfortunately, when you buy a house in a senior community, you have to abide by their arbitrary restrictions whether you like it or not. And this case (“Mesa widow vs. HOA over caregiver grandson,” Friday) is no exception.
Although the grandmother is sick, old, and needs care around the clock, she has not been determined to be legally disabled under the Fair Housing Act.
If she is, then it will be a different story, and the HOA would have to play by different rules in letting her grandson stay and care for his granny. HOA regulations are plain and simple.
SAN DIEGO, CALIF.
GOV. JAN BREWER
Respect church-state line
While reading my paper, I was appalled and shocked at Gov. Jan Brewer’s public admittance to using prayer during her staff meetings and that she doesn’t think religion should be checked at the door but integrated into her political life (Friday, Tribune). Excuse me, but aren’t all those things she is proud of and strives for the very things that don’t define the separation of church and state?
As a student studying religion and nationalism, I’m aware of the fact that America is a secular nation. Regardless if Brewer agrees with this, she is not doing her duty as governor to uphold this separation. I do not agree with prayer being suggested while she holds meetings that decide Arizona’s path. I do think that she needs to separate her religion from her political life, because that is what is written in the Constitution. I should know — there is a copy of one hanging in every Arizona State University classroom.
If she cannot do this, then maybe “God” was wrong to appoint her as Arizona’s governor. I know Arizona is a religious, Republican state. But there are still a percentage of us liberal, nonreligious folk who count on politicians to uphold what our Constitution says. If there is not prayer in public schools, then there should be no prayer at her staff meetings, period.
Only need one military
I have been polling all of my Democratic friends to help me understand why this nation needs a Civilian Defense Force as well trained and as well funded as our military. So far, none have responded to my query so I assume they are as confused as I. I would welcome an explanation from your readers as to why the president feels the necessity to arm and train a separate force, and who they might be trained to protect.