Letters: Arranged marriage 'the best decision'

I'M RESPONDING to the article written by Diana David. I'm a first generation Indian-American who decided to get an arranged marriage, and I feel it was the best decision of my life. I know plenty of other first-generation Indian-Americans who decided to get an arranged marriage who are living a good life.

The problem with this article is that most Americans don't understand arranged marriage and think it's forced on you by your parents. People ask me questions like, "How can you marry someone you never met?" I try my best to educate them on Indian culture.

There is no data showing that Indian-Americans are straying away from arranged marriages. I feel that Diana David showing the readers unsuccessful arranged marriages is fueling the stereotypes. I feel this article could have included stories about successful arranged marriages.

Sreekanth Somarajan

Upper Darby, Pa.

DeLissio's mess

When state Rep. Pamela DeLissio applied for the homestead exemption act for a tax break, she declared her primary residence as Harrisburg, making her ineligible as a candidate in the 194th District. To say otherwise and return the tax break shows tax fraud.

When state Rep. Pamela DeLissio switched her driver's license, car registration and automobile insurance to her Harrisburg address, that also supports her residency as a Harrisburg resident, thus making her ineligible as a candidate in the 194th District.

Merely switching her license, registration and insurance back to Philadelphia shows a corrupt politician who will do anything to be reelected.

Since this fraud has been uncovered, she now claims Philadelphia as her residency and is now committing insurance fraud, as she paid lower insurance premiums in Harrisburg.

Judge Friedman is equally culpable and should be removed from the bench, endorsing election, tax and insurance fraud. One can only wonder if Judge Friedman's court ruling was predicated on party affiliations or friends, like the original dismissal of the DUI case involving Rep. Cherelle Parker.

Gary J. English

Verona, Pa.

The drill team

Imagine if your neighbor owned a nice big backyard - hundreds of acres that he or she purchased with hard-earned income. Now imagine that oil and natural gas was discovered a mile below that privately owned land. Most would say, "Good for them."

In rural and western Pennsylvania, that's exactly what happened with the Marcellus Shale. This development, largely taking place on privately owned land, is creating tens of thousands of jobs, has generated more than $2 billion in tax revenue since 2008 and is providing hope and opportunity to some of Pennsylvania's most economically depressed regions. It's also improving air quality and our environment.

Yet some, including this newspaper, believe that we should enact even more taxes on this growing industry. The Daily News stated in a recent editorial that, "We should move quickly to capture the value we can as soon as we can."

Readers should know that the value of the Marcellus Shale is being "captured" by Philadelphians, and all Pennsylvanians, each and every day. It's captured each month in more affordable PGW and PECO bills. It's captured down in South Philadelphia where hundreds of union jobs were saved at the refineries, thanks in part to shale gas and oil development. It's captured through the millions distributed to Philadelphia and the surrounding counties through impact fees, even though there's not a Marcellus Shale well for more than 100 miles.

Philadelphia, like Pennsylvania, is capturing the benefits from responsible natural-gas development.

Steve Forde

Vice President,

Communications & Outreach

Marcellus Shale Coalition

Let's Rhee-examine

Re: "Time to stop seniority-based teacher staffing":

Self-proclaimed education reformer George Parker declares himself an ally of controversial former D.C. Chancellor Michelle Rhee, whose billionaire-funded PAC StudentsFirst is dedicated to backing legislation that curbs collective-bargaining rights, fights to eliminate seniority in teachers' contracts and to increase the role of quantitative evaluations in teachers' job security.

At no time in his op-ed does Mr. Parker give one iota of evidence that basing teacher evaluation mainly on the results of high-stakes standardized testing has ever been a reliable method of judging what he calls an "effective teacher."

Why doesn't he just admit the truth: That his mentor, Michelle Rhee, and all her rich backers are determined to destroy teachers unions in order to hasten the commercialization of public education for profit?

Gloria C. Endres

Philadelphia