Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard
Link copied to clipboard

Letters to the Editor | Nov. 9, 2023

Inquirer readers on the exoneration of David Sparks, the limits of free speech, and following Ohio's lead.

David Sparks and his mother, Tameeka Sparks, hug in the Wawa parking lot near SCI Phoenix, Monday, in Collegeville, Pa.
David Sparks and his mother, Tameeka Sparks, hug in the Wawa parking lot near SCI Phoenix, Monday, in Collegeville, Pa.Read moreJessica Griffin / Staff Photographer

Model Ohio

Voters in Ohio just voted to protect abortion rights and legalize marijuana. Why can’t Pennsylvanians have the same opportunity to vote on these issues? Is our legislature afraid that a majority of voters will follow Ohio’s lead and our state laws will reflect the will of the people? Someone needs to remind them that is how democracy works.

Stefan Keller, Huntingdon Valley

15 years lost

David Sparks being exonerated after 15 years in prison proves that we have a two-tier justice system. If you’re white and rich, the odds will be on your side. Meanwhile, people of color or those with limited resources will surely have odds against them. One line from Common Pleas Court Judge Scott DiClaudio jumps out at me. He noted that Sparks was the sixth murder conviction he had tossed out in three days. “That’s gotta be a world record,” he said. I, for one, have gone from being sad about these cases to angry. All praise goes to the District Attorney’s Office’s Conviction Integrity Unit and the Pennsylvania Innocence Project.

Joseph J. Obelcz, Hatfield, jjobelcz@gmail.com

Free speech

Columnist Jonathan Zimmerman was misguided in his assessment of university obligations. It’s not about substituting therapy for education but distinguishing between right and wrong. Colleges are obligated to teach students how to think critically, and yes, one of the ways we can foster this is through exposure to “a wide array of ideas, including those we find alien, insulting, or distasteful.” However, there’s a distinction between First Amendment rights and turning a blind eye to dangerous hate speech. The rally cries of “Jewish genocide” and “From the river to the sea” aren’t benign. They’re tantamount to running into a crowded theater and shouting, “Fire!”

Colleges have a duty to distinguish between invoking one’s rights and ensuring the protection of all members of society. At every institution where protests calling for the elimination of Israel and the Jewish people went unchecked and unprevented, there was an egregious dereliction of duty to protect students and permission granted for these displays of hate — condoning not only antisemitism but the actions of Hamas terrorists.

This isn’t a “heated moment about hurt feelings,” it’s a failure to condemn antisemitism and terror. Whether we are talking about Jews, Muslims, members of the LGBTQ community, or people of color, failure to protect people from certain harm is wrong. When institutions repeatedly fail to do so, then yes, the power of the purse is the last resort that tends to bring clarity between right and wrong. It’s time for the institutions that pride themselves on their elite reputations to stand on the side of what’s ethical and legal and stop hiding behind the excuse of First Amendment rights. Only then can our universities truly begin to be a part of the solution instead of a source of the problem.

Leah Bookbinder, Philadelphia

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.