Feedback: Constitutional conventions and circumcisions

Jan 14, 2015 at 1:00 am

Pol testing

In response to an editorial postscript from Jack Lessenberry ("A Cheer and a Boo"), reader Thomas A. Wilson Jr. of Detroit wrote:

I read with interest the Jan. 7 article by Jack Lessenberry about two bills that Gov. Rick Snyder signed. One bill is aimed at testing "suspicious" welfare recipients for illegal drug use. There's an adage that says, "Real leadership leads by example" and this is what the legislators, who voted for passage of the bill, should do — lead by example! They should not ask anything of welfare recipients, or citizens, which they would not subject themselves to. The legislators, including Snyder, should be the first ones volunteering to be tested. After all, they are being paid with taxpayer dollars just like welfare recipients!

Con-con cons

In response to Jack Lessenberry's plea for a constitutional convention, Dave Hornstein of Birmingham wrote:

While Jack Lessenberry means well, his proposal for a state constitutional convention is a bad idea.

The last time a con-con proposal was on the ballot was in 2010. The Detroit Free Press endorsed this proposal, but the denizens of its editorial page were extremely vague when it came to what they wanted to see in a new state constitution, thereby making an unconvincing case. It was therefore no surprise that the proposal lost by a landslide.

If a new con-con proposal were approved by voters, the delegates would be elected from current state legislative districts, which are gerrymandered Republican. Delegates would be chosen in a low-turnout special election, which is virtually guaranteed to produce a lopsided Republican majority. In all likelihood, there would be a bigger preponderance of tea party extremists among con-con delegates than there already is in the legislature. This group would probably produce a new constitution that is worse than the current one. It would deserve to be voted down, making the entire process a big waste of time, money, and effort.

A better solution would be petition drives to place individual constitutional amendments on the ballot. These proposed amendments could cover such subjects as allowing for a graduated income tax, repealing term limits, and establishing a reapportionment commission. Will anybody take up the cause?


Surprisingly, one of the stories that generated the most discussion on our Facebook page was the correlation between circumcision and autism. Readers posted like crazy:

THIS IS GARBAGE. TRASH journalism. Shame on MT for posting something like this. Way to perpetuate garbage psuedoscientific fearmongering. Ugh. Goodbye, MT.

Really MT? So now all your jounalistic integrity is just gone? What are you now the Inquirer? So sad. MT used to be a most trusted paper. Now, it's fit to wrap fish.

If we are going to circumcise males, we need to circumcise females too.

Funny, it's shocking to suggest it for females but no one sees it's just as horrid for a male. Nerving endings are nerve ending folks, it's horribly painful and senseless!

I don't think this article is legit but there is no good reason to circumcise.

This is so dumb it hurts.

It's a known fact that 100 percent of autism cases involved the consumption of water. Facts don't lie.

I was snipped, I turned out fine ... mostly. LOL

How stupid! Are they trying to say it's because you're messing with the "small brain"? LOL. Get serious.

The kid is cute though ...