Jamaica Gleaner
Published: Friday | July 17, 2009
Home : Commentary
NOTE-WORTHY

  • Ban songs, not children

    I was disappointed to see the article in The Sunday Gleaner stating that children 16 years old and under would not be allowed to attend Sumfest Dancehall Night this year.

    Sumfest is supposed to be a family event and I think the promoters are bowing to the pressure of the entertainers at the expense of putting on a clean and decent show. I think this decision is sending the wrong message to both the entertainers and the patrons, namely, that 'slackness is OK now that the children are not here'.

    Remember that expletives and raw sexual presentations will have legal implications, and so I am asking the promoters to reconsider this decision and just ensure that the show is clean and fit for everyone (including the children). There is also the huge financial fallout with the ban.

    - Sumfest Fan

    Coral Gardens

    Montego Bay

    St James

  • A case for polygamy?

    The article 'Single and super - Lonely life for single Christians', published in The Sunday Gleaner, was a good one and addressed what many churches and pastors have been afraid to address in any meaningful way. The simple fact is that men are in short supply everywhere, and the Church is no exception.

    To solve the problem, the Church would have to advocate 'husband sharing', and that is not unscriptural. All of the patriarchs in the Bible - Abraham, David, Solomon and all the kings of Israel - were allowed to have multiple wives. So I am inviting the Church to look at that as a solution to the problem for us single Christian women in the Church who have no prospects of finding a husband for ourselves. Selah!

    - June

    jc_2good4u@hotmail.com

  • School fees ransom?

    I am quite frustrated with the policy of some school administrations when dealing with the matter of collection of supplementary fees. I speak specifically of Foga Road High School, May Pen, Clarendon, where a letter from the school, dated June 22, expressly stated that school fees for the next academic year must be paid before the report for the previous year can be issued.

    I fail to understand the rationale behind this decision which forces parents to pay supplementary fees not yet due.

    - F. McLeod

    faithiedee@yahoo.com

    May Pen

    Clarendon

  • Home | Lead Stories | News | Business | Sport | Commentary | Letters | Entertainment | Social |