In regard to the magistrate position in Aiken, it seems to me that a lot of people are not looking to the future ...
Our state legislature put in place requirements for the selection or appointment of our magistrates. This should be followed, not for what we want it to say, but for what it was intended to do - that was to place someone in the magistrate's position who is not just professionally qualified, but academically qualified as well. In short, someone with education and experience.
I am certain the two gentlemen, whom I do not know, are qualified by some experiences. But look closely at their education. One gentleman has a degree from an accredited university or college. The other from a "diploma mill."
By placing a "diploma-mill" educated person into a position of deciding legal issues, are we opening up some other, greater legal issues in the future? And what about possible lawsuits challenging the judge's qualifications?
Let's look at our need for teachers in the near future. If our legislators and governor can toss out the sanctioning of accreditation and licensing by our state department of education, then can we not expect graduates from "diploma mills" to apply to teach and educate our children?
Does holding a diploma or a degree qualify someone for a position? Or does just experience qualify?
I am surprised at Sen. Tommy Moore's, D-Clearwater, position in this situation. What does education mean to him? How hard did he work to obtain his educational credentials? And were the politics taken out of the application process, as he stated when the Graniteville position was vacant? There is a question that asks about political affiliation. Are politics out of the application process? I think not.
Alan Miner, Warrenville, S.C.