To My Fellow Readers:

Under Biblical law, the tax-funded prison system would be eliminated and swift justice reinstated, and measures against perjury and false accusations more firmly established.

Crimes would focus on the guilty party compensating the victim and preventing future offenses rather than on state punishment. Classifying crimes as “against the state” shifts the focus from victim compensation to criminal punishment. Biblical law has things the other way round. For example, our approach to robbery is flawed in several ways:

Victims of assault and robbery see their attacker imprisoned, yes, yet they also indirectly fund the criminal’s prosecution and housing through taxes. In Vermont, taxpayers pay over $50,000 annually to house a prisoner. Victims receive no compensation; instead, they bear the financial burden, while the criminal is supported by taxpayers who had no part in the crime.

Think of another scenario from the viewpoint of a survivor of a serial rapist and murderer. Years after the attack, the victim still suffered mental and physical trauma while her assaulter was “eating three meals a day, had a television, and didn’t have to work or worry about rent. He had gotten married in prison and was having people write to him…he was costing the state $26,500 per year just in food and housing…I was a victim, yet no one was paying my rent or making sure I got three meals a day…he was sitting on death row with his every need being cared for.”

In the Bible, justice was based on compensation to the victim by the guilty party and on discouraging future crimes. With an eye to prevention, the Bible imposed an uneven punishment for theft; you had to give back more than you took. Exodus 22:1 reads, “If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and slaughters it or sells it, he shall restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep.” Proverbs 6:31 says, “Yet when he is found, he must restore sevenfold; He may have to give up all the substance of his house.”

This system ensures that neither victims nor innocent bystanders are taxed to fund it. Instead, victims receive overcompensation for their losses, while heavy penalties discourage future theft. There is nothing immoral about this approach. The immorality, it might be argued, lies in what we are doing at present.

-Jeb Smith, Rupert 

To the Editor:

Who do our elected Senators and Congresswoman represent? Are they not accountable to their constituents? On the 6th of March 2025 I e-mailed Senators Bernie Sanders and Senator Peter Welch and Congresswoman Becca Balint concerning the Democrats behavior at President Trump’s address to the joint session of Congress on March 4th to which I asked our elected representatives what they stood for. The e-mail reads.

What do you stand for? On Tuesday the 4th of March 2025 I watched President Trump’s speech to the joint session of Congress, and I was appalled by the abhorrent behavior of the Democrat party’s not standing for things that by all means should be celebrated by every American citizen living in the United States. I would have expected the Democrat party to stand and applaud the naming of a wildlife refuge for Jocelyn Nungaray, a 12-year-old American girl, was sexually assaulted and killed by illegal aliens in Texas. I would have expected the Democrat party to stand and applaud the Laken Riley Act a woman murdered by an illegal alien in Georgia. I would have expected the Democrat party to stand and applaud the capture and extradition of the terrorist that planned the Abby Gate bombing that killed thirteen U.S. servicemen. I would have expected the Democrat party to stand and applaud D.J. Daniel a thirteen year old brain cancer survivor who was honored by over 400 law enforcement agencies when he was made an honorary Secret Service Agent.

I understand you might not want to stand and applaud policies that Trump is imposing but to not stand and applaud for any of the above only goes to show how out of touch you are with the 76,838,984 Americans who voted for him. My question to you is what exactly do you stand for?

I sent the e-mail to all my friends and relatives and urged them to contact their elected officials to let them know how you feel. Most of the replays from them was, good luck getting an answer from them. They were right so far all I got was crickets.

The two Senators did not reply. This is the second time I got no reply from Peter Welch. This time I did not even get the obligatory form response from Bernie Sanders. In the case of Becca Balint there was a box to check whether you wanted a response or just express your thoughts. I checked the response box. As of yet no response from any of them.

It is my conclusion that these people do not represent their constituents and don’t even care what we think. They are not deserving to be our representatives if they can’t even answer a simple e-mail to justify their actions. Again, I ask, who do you represent, what do you stand for? Their silence speaks volumes.

-James “Vito” Lanese