To the editor:
The Civil War ended 159 years ago, yet today some blue states and cities are considering reparations to the descendants of slaves. This means taking money from people who never owned slaves and giving it to people who never were slaves. This is nonsensical.
Slavery was an acceptable practice in the world for centuries. Africans went into the interior, brought out captured slaves, and sold them to slavers on the coast. In 1804 the United States outlawed the importation of slaves, and Republican president Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. The country saw the evil of slavery and ended it.
My ancestors immigrated legally to the United States in 1867 and 1891 and had nothing to do with slavery. My late husband’s ancestors immigrated to the Colonies about 1650, but they were all Quaker farmers who never owned slaves. Why should taxpayer money from families like mine be used to fund reparations? In addition, if one takes this idea far enough, I feel like I should be eligible for reparations because my German immigrant grandparents were discriminated against in World War I. Furthermore, what about my husband’s greatgrandfather who fought for the Union in the Civil War? Shouldn’t his descendants be given remuneration for his service toward the freedom of slaves?
Slavery is a relic of the past, and the present should not tolerate the absurdity of indemnifi cation.
Carole Underwood Maple City
