Editor, The Smithfield Times:

The author of “Monument task force meets” (Oct. 14) was quick to point out the task force appointee’s skin color in the article. People already have elevated emotions regarding the Confederate monument controversy, therefore does this paper have to make it a black/white issue as well?

Controversy sells papers but race-baiting is a turnoff. I may have a different opinion than some of the MTF appointees, so to clarify this for readers, my beliefs are not because of the color of my skin or anyone else’s.

Whitewashing history because it offends some puts us in grave danger as a society to repeat history. People conveniently ignore that history books have been revised. Public school books are much different than the history books I taught my children from while homeschooling them.

The article was correct that I suggested erecting a statue of Harriet Tubman next to the Confederate statue, but I also suggested erecting others like Frederick Douglas, Martin Luther King Jr., etc., to tell a historical lesson of what people of color have overcome. However, my MLK suggestion was quickly shot down by a fellow appointee who stated that MLK, like Obama, is still not accepted, so adding an MLK statue is not acceptable.

I personally don’t know anyone who disregards MLK. The U.S. black population is at only 13%. This proves that a lot of white people voted for Obama not just once but twice. Also, is it that incomprehensible to believe that people who don’t “accept” Obama may just not like his policies?

Lastly, unlike what was stated in the paper, the only job of the Monument Task Force appointees is to investigate possible options for relocation or contextualization of the statue. The Board of Supervisors will have the final vote, not the MTF.

Maggie Richards

Smithfield

 

Editor’s note: The Smithfield Times has reported numerous times on the role of the task force and that the final decision belongs to the Board of Supervisors.