Dear Editor,
The purpose of this article is for people to think independently and hopefully understand.
Most people are of the assumption that discrimination is wrong but the fact is that is not true.
In plain English, to “discriminate” means to distinguish, single out, or make a distinction. In everyday life, when faced with more than one option, we discriminate in arriving at almost every decision we make. Racism is wrong but discrimination is not necessarily wrong.
One example of God’s discrimination is found in Genesis 4:3-5 which says, “And it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had RESPECT unto Abel and to his offering: But unto Cain and to his offering he had NOT RESPECT.” God clearly discriminated in favor of Abel and against Cain.
We are all sinners as human but God discriminates, He accepts the righteous, those are the people that live pleasing to Him and keep His commandments. Their reward is eternal salvation. The human who is living in sin and does not repent and accept Christ as their personal savior and does not keep His commandments will be tormented in hell everlasting. We see now that God discriminates.
Proverbs 8:13: The fear of the LORD is to hate evil. Pride, arrogance, an evil lifestyle, and perverted speech I despise. What is evil? Isaiah 5:20: Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
Evil explained by God is the acceptance of and the will to sin. What is sin? Sin is the breaking of God’s law. That means God does not tolerate sin and when you sin He hates it. But when you live pleasing to Christ He loves that.
In other words, God discriminates on acceptance of people that will live to please Him or choose not to please Him. This means God discriminates. If a man and a woman are married and living together God approves of that, if a man and woman are not married and are living together God will not approve of that. This is proof God is a loving discriminating God with zero tolerance of sin.
Some people also say they do not believe in labels and will not like to be labeled. God is also a loving discriminating God that labels people. The labels are righteous and unrighteous, saved and lost, good or bad.
The conclusion is when you hear about discrimination please keep an open mind to hear the entire story. Discrimination is not necessarily wrong. Racism is always wrong, but not discrimination.
I point out the facts and understanding leaves you with choice to see and accept the facts as you see fit. Choose wisely.
I will continue next time with other topics of political ideology.

The Patriot Miguel Arrindell

Dear Editor,

  As you know I am a strong advocate of government taking over the public transportation. One would ask why is Russell constantly hammering government on this issue? Simple. Public transportation belongs in the hands of the public. And should not be run by any private union.

  “It is difficult to fix.“ An answer I have been getting from government officials, including a Minister of TEATT [Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transportation and Telecommunication – Ed.], members of bus drivers union, multiple bus permit owners, bus company permit owners, you name them.

  My response to that is consistent: Ask Holland for help! I must have written this ad nauseum, but it is worldwide known that Holland is among the top countries in the world, if not the top country, where the public transportation regulation and infrastructure is concerned.

  Is it really that difficult to get it fixed or is it difficult for those who have been in government and have manipulated the system to acquire umpteen permits and formed bus companies to have to relinquish those, in my opinion dubiously acquired, permits?

  I am still at a loss why public entities should be in the hands of private citizens. In an interview with Lady Grace (January 24, 2018) one of the candidates vying for a seat in Parliament, when asked why does not government take it over, answered that government can’t handle it, prompting Lady Grace to request a confirmation on the answer given to that question, which she got.

  But is it in line with the opening headline of this letter? Also does not the fact that government does not place bus stop signs along the routes which would at the least help to avoid buses from stopping at random, and too often at least three times within thirty meters to pick up or let off passengers causing frustration to other drivers, underscores that?

  I did not follow the whole interview, but I did not hear any effort to work on getting it regulated if that candidate was elected.

  I will not pose one of my famous questions this time because that person is not in government. I had a late friend who used to tell me as long as you’re not lying you should write it and let whoever the shoe fits wear it, but when I can avoid that I still do.

  In the course of time someone asked me if I thought that Holland would refuse to help us. If so be the case then more reasons to tell the Dutchman that in this case also he is just as guilty as the rest, but I have not heard that we asked.

  Of late more and more we are hearing what I would classify as embarrassing words or action on the side of government or from those who were in government. This continues to substantiate my reasoning for calling for a complete replacement of those for-so-often-reshuffled members of government.

  One would think that after toppling government so often and repeatedly dealing with the process of new elections in so short a period by the same group of people, that they would become efficient in doing so. No this is not the case. Like almost everything else, beside regulating exorbitant salaries and gratuities for themselves, again another blunder was committed by those in government.

  My question to that is: Have they become so complacent with getting away with murder that it is taken for granted so that they now totally disregard the Constitution of Sint Maarten (remarks from Bosman comes to mind) just like they have been doing with the people of Sint Maarten?  Is not all of what have happened over the years, and what continues to happen lately, enough reason to call on the people of Sint Maarten to replace all the old ones with new blood? I think so.

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,
I am a 63-year-old male Canadian citizen. My wife and I have been coming to St Maarten since 1996. We originally were spending 3 months a year on the island in timeshares, some owned, some exchanged for using RCI. Five years ago we decided to sign a long-term lease on an apartment in Phillipsburg.

Dear Editor,

  When Monsieur Ligarius grew frustrated by what he most likely perceived as our lack of effort, of application, or by our poor performance, he would try to motivate us by scolding and lecturing us. He would call us barbarians, savages; with no regard for the beauty and importance of instruction in general, and of the French language and culture in particular. He would reproach us our so-called (material) privileges as compared with students in some of the poorer communes in his native Guadeloupe. He would explain how students, there, were eager to learn, despite their lack of classrooms, of materials and teachers.

  Those impromptus, those lectures still resonate in my head. Oddly enough, that is when I felt him the most caring. He would have been a superb lawyer, statesman, university lecturer, or a scientist (like his son Philippe: Ph.D. in Applied Sciences, Rouen, 1995; reportedly, a genius in Math; once a teacher at one of the most prestigious “lycées” in France; now, if my information is correct, an inspector.)

  Some of us savages would set about provoking the lectures, those admonitions we so enjoyed as they would also take him away from the planned routine instruction. Some others resented his whippings, his reprimands, and the referring to us as savages.

  But we were no easy lot, and he was, most likely, merely trying to motivate us, as best he knew how – there was no malice intended. To tell the truth, most of us were, indeed, barbarians, savages of sorts. In those days, that is how most St. Martiners were regarded by French education officials in Guadeloupe and beyond. Back in those good old days, “barbarians,” or “savages” were folks who didn’t speak the Greek of that era (the 50s and early 60s): the French language. And so, why feel aggrieved? Why be bitter? Why be resentful towards our teacher?

  The fact that some 10 to 15 years later, he had acquired sufficient competency to teach English, that he taught English in Saint Martin, and later in Guadeloupe is ample proof that he had nothing against the language itself, or against St. Martiners, for that matter.

  During those early years of his teaching career on the island, he may have simply misread the attitudes of most of us towards the French language, and the difficulties we faced. Monsieur Ligarius mastered the French language; he was a superb teacher. One got the impression that he loved the profession, that he loved teaching his savages, despite the challenges we placed on him. Maybe, in part, that is why he stayed so long among us.

  I couldn’t find any reference to him online apart from the info on his son, but my search was not exhaustive. When I left home for the first time, in 1963, he was still a young man (in his early to mid 30s), and a school principal for a number of years already. I am told that he returned to Guadeloupe in the mid 70s, that he finished his career teaching at the secondary level, and died there, in the 1990s.

  I have it from a reliable source that there was one St. Martiner at his funeral – one of his numerous students – to bid our old master farewell. We get caught up in our little lives, and much too often, we cannot find, or make some time to say thank you to folks we are indebted to. Such is life, but it need not be that way.

  I have often wondered how he happened on the isle of the savages. Did he request the posting, or did they just dispatch us one of their brightest due to the heavy challenge we presented? But the two are not mutually exclusive. He arrived a few years after Guadeloupe became a DOM (French Overseas Department) in 1946; when an Antillean intellectual élite began to replace metropolitan functionaries in some such posts. For some reason, the obvious bright young man did not pursue higher education in France. All of that, I think, may explain how the exceptionally gifted young teacher happened among us.

  It doesn’t surprise me at all, that no school is named after Monsieur Henri Ligarius, our master, my idol; neither in his native Le Moule, in Guadeloupe, nor in St. Martin where he spent most of his teaching career. He was a man whose bearing, education, principles, abilities and talents must have incited a lot of envy, caused much jealousy. And it must not have helped matters that he didn’t suffer fools easily. He was not intimidated by education authorities in Guadeloupe and/or by politicians there, or in Saint Martin.

  The next time I’m having coffee on the Water Front, and I see my master striding hurriedly up the Bayside, I won’t let him get by me. I’ll insist that he joins me, and I’ll set about trying to impress him with my French, so as to make him proud of me. I doubt I’ll succeed, for he has such high standards. I’ll tell him that it’s been quite a journey, but that most of his savages, old men now, have done quite well, given their handicaps; and so did some others who have long departed.

  I’ll explain that, for all of us, it was due, in great part, to his selfless, dedicated, “no nonsense teaching.” I’ll inform him that some of his star students have had schools named after them. That, for sure, will impress him, and he’ll smile.

  I think I know what our old master will be thinking: “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose,” the more it changes, the more it’s the same (old) thing. I’ll tell him how much we are, forever, grateful to him. We’ll laugh about those bygone reprimands, and the whippings. My master and I will then discuss education (teaching/learning); the fickleness of recognition; politics and the profession, namely the politics of education.

Gérard M. Hunt