Dear Editor,

Ms. Gardiner claims that several of us (I guess she’s referring to the three people who responded to her letter) misunderstood her thesis, but I would beg to differ. I understood it perfectly.

Ms. Gardiner doesn’t feel like she should help pay for public education because she has no children. She sees those of us who have children as selfish people wanting others to cover our debt.

To me, not wanting to better your community or your society, whether you have children or not, reeks of selfishness.

Parental responsibility means that I do the best I can to make sure my children take advantage of their education and become productive members of society. The child-free populace of which Ms. Gardiner is so proudly a part of depends on the thousands of people who are educated in public schools.

Then again, maybe she doesn’t need to see a doctor or go to the dentist or need car insurance, or health care, etc.

I’m proud to live in a society that believes and understands the importance of providing an education for all children, regardless if they’re rich or not. Unfortunately, Ms. Gardiner does not see nor understand the benefits of such a system. She only sees her boat and her show horse.

Oh, and thanks for the data supporting why public education is failing; so many people can’t read the newspaper! Is that what you’d call an educated guess?

Norm Bolitho

New Castle