LETTERS: Home religious training is safe

Home religious training is safe

Regarding the article "Revamping religious ed" concerning religious education in the homes of parishioners, members of my church's pastoral team and I offer several points worth noting.

In the many years we have had a home program, we have never had a reported incident where a child's safety was compromised in any way. The education and formation a child receives in a small group has proven to be effective in teaching religion, especially with the proper training and supervision the director of religious education provides. To say that in a different era before the sex abuse scandal, this wasn't a problem is to raise questions about home programs that have no relation to the sex abuse scandal.

Also, "anti-sex abuse" training is an inaccurate way to describe Virtus training. Virtus training, required for all religion instructors and helpers, is aimed at the education of all adults for the protection of all children.

Offering religious education in the home is not only the result of lack of space on the parish grounds. Our experience has taught us that with proper safeguards in place just as they are in classroom settings, home programs have proven to be a valuable venue for the faith formation of young people.

Rev. James M. McNamara

Nesconset

Editor's note: The writer is pastor of the Parish of the Holy Cross.

New polling system?

Vote's not in yet

I can't believe people are complaining about the new voting system .

I voted Tuesday and there were no problems at my polling place. It is a simple two-step process: Fill in the bubbles, stick it in the machine. It's easier to operate than an ATM. Would people rather use the old machines? They belong in the Smithsonian. Maybe things would go a little smoother if people did a little homework and knew who was on the ballot before they went to vote.

Michael Chimenti

Oakland Gardens

I can't help but wonder who got paid for coming up with this "new" idea on how to vote. It not only takes longer, but I object to having absolutely no privacy. The "privacy sleeve" in use at my polling place was a plain manila envelope.

Voters were given the envelope and needed to take their paper ballot out of it and place it face up in one of a row of scanners, side-by-side with poll watchers and other voters standing nearby.

Please tell me we are not going backward.

Shirlee Leeolou

Port Washington