Comments on: About

By: M

Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:31:40 +0000

I read a couple of your posts and then read your bio. Your posts make sense considering you are clearly such a complete lefty. Good luck with that.

By: shekenne

shekenne — Mon, 16 May 2011 18:03:37 +0000

I had precisely the same reaction when I read the Star; however, my son (a lawyer who most definitely does not like the Patriot Act and whose wife is an ACLU lawyer who was equally alarmed) said that the court’s reasoning was that people had other remedies when police entered their homes illegally. In other words, given the potential for harm during a violent confrontation, the better approach would be for the homeowner to sue for civil damages. The dissent felt the decision was too broad–that it should still have allowed for defense in “egregious” situations. While I still have qualms, I am less upset given the fact that the court endorsed alternative remedies and recognized that police must act in accordance with the law, just like everyone else.

By: Jonathan Cooksey

Jonathan Cooksey — Mon, 16 May 2011 17:42:44 +0000

I saw something in the Star yesterday 5-15-2011, that scares me to death. Maybe you saw it too? On the front page there was a story about how our Indiana Supremes voted 3-2 in favor of warrantless house searches and said if we don’t like it to take the police to court???? The Supremes said they didn’t want the cops getting hurt. Ummmm. Excuse me? What happened to the 4th Amendment? I realize that the Patriot Act grants no knock warrants for subjects of terrorist investigations and/

By: Julia

Julia — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 18:16:24 +0000

Just read your article, “The Language of Crazy” in which you discuss the power that language has. You mention the terrible consequences that have resulted from young people being taunted for being homosexual, and you refer to the shooting in Arizona as possibly resulting from hate speech. I am in agreement with you. I am not a supporter of Jan Brewer, but you lost me when you referred to her as “intellectually challenged”. I do not understand your use of name-calling in a piece that denounces it. Can’t you simply state her position and let that stand on its own? Isn’t “intellectually challenged” a euphemism, or pc term, for “mentally retarded”? As a former special education teacher, sister of a mentally retarded man, and grandma to a boy whose best friend is constantly taunted with the term “retard” because he is hearing impaired and has speech problems as a result, I am sensitive to this term and its use as an insult. Please don’t let your message be lost or overlooked because of your hypocrisy in using name-calling in an article that condemns it.

By: shekenne

shekenne — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:37:57 +0000

Thank you so much!

By: Greg and Wendy Phillips

Greg and Wendy Phillips — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:06:01 +0000

The Star will be less interesting without your clear and insightful voice. You speak for many other people and deserve to be heard by a broader audience. Thanks for adding sanity and reasonableness to the public discourse on so many vital issues.

By: Marvin Needler

Marvin Needler — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:55:25 +0000

I was very disappointed to read the last paragraph of your editorial today – your last column for the Star. I have always made a point of reading your editorials. Just to mention one of special elucidation for me was titled Constitution 101 (May 2010); it made a clear delineation between religious expression in the “public square” and the “public sector”. Yes, I must have skipped that lesson. Please keep these great essays coming, by some medium. Best, Marvin.

By: Jon Palmer

Jon Palmer — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 21:08:01 +0000

I am sorry to see you are not writing for the Star anymore. I usually disagree with you 100% of the time, but I do like your thoughts and arguments. On gay marriage, why not a civil union law for any two humans, a position Pres. Obama supports? Why the push to use the word “marriage”? Will Indiana ever look at that? Probably not unless forced to by the courts or a big swing in public opinion or make up of the Dems in the legislature Good luck in the future.

By: shekenne

shekenne — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:34:52 +0000

Thanks for the kind words. I hope you will visit this blog often!

By: Dale Bertelson

Dale Bertelson — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:17:41 +0000

Sheila:
I am really sad that your column will no longer be published in the Star. It was among a very few that actually provided a factual and thoughtful voice for those of us in Indiana who have chosen not to drink the Kool-Aid.

By: shekenne

shekenne — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:03:12 +0000

Thanks, Tom! (It has been a long time!)

You can always join the conversation here at http://www.sheilakennedy.net. I’ll also be doing a monthly column for the IBJ.

By: Tom Bolles

Tom Bolles — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 13:45:43 +0000

Sheila,
It was with great sadness that I read your last column in the Indpls Star this morning. Also, sorry to miss you @ the 50th reunion last Sept.

Hope all is well with you and yours. Vicki & I are enjoying the good life in northern IN.

Tom

ps. Although your views and mine were not always on the same page, I will miss the thought provoking views and your well spoken style

By: shekenne

shekenne — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 01:45:42 +0000

I’ll add you to my distribution list.

By: Leora

Leora — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:15:24 +0000

I’ve not gotten into blogging, but I’d really appreciate being on your distribution list for your monthly article. If not, I’ll continue to get them via Yvonne. Thanks.

By: shekenne

shekenne — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 00:44:26 +0000

Thanks for the VERY kind words!

I’ll still be sending Yvonne my longer posts for distribution, but I hope you’ll bookmark the blog and become part of what I hope will be a conversation rather than a monologue!