Letters to the Editor for Saturday, March 22, 2008
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Published: March 21, 2008
Columnist chided for Falwell remark
How sad that conservative columnist Michael Gerson chose Holy Week to take an unmerited and uncharacteristically brainless swipe at the late Rev. Jerry Falwell by mentioning him as someone who “spouted hate” in his recent syndicated column, printed in The News & Advance on March 19.
Please don’t automatically associate this newspaper with Falwell disparagement because the editors chose to print Gerson’s column. But hold Gerson accountable. Why he felt the need to make that comment, I cannot say.
Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Media Institute and a fellow Christian, has called for Gerson to apologize to the Falwell family, Thomas Road Baptist Church and Liberty University. Of course, the Falwells and sensible Christians will forgive him, as they should. Knight’s excellent column can be found at Townhall.com.
As a columnist myself, I fully understand the occasional slip of the tongue or ill-thought-out comment. I have inadvertently or intentionally offended where I had no right to. There is a difference between godly offense and human offense. I make no apology for the one, but should always seek to avoid the other. So, I forgive Gerson. I’d just like to see him take the high road and make that apology.
DEBBIE THURMAN
Madison Heights
Deadly puffing
This year, 400,000 people will die of tobacco-related illness. More U.S. citizens die each day from smoking than in a year in Iraq. In fact, nearly 40,000 people will die this year from disease due to second-hand smoke. It’s not quite as dramatic as being killed in a bomb explosion, but it is death all the same. During the time from 2000-2003, 755 people were diagnosed with lung cancer at Centra Health. Of those, 665 are now dead.
These deaths are not the result of some radical terrorist group. They are the result of the tobacco industry. And the majority of the victims get caught as young adults. Ninety percent of smokers start using tobacco regularly at or before the age of 18. In my eight-year career as a physician here in Lynchburg, I have already seen enough tragedy related to smoking to last a lifetime. The things I have seen have made me want to get the facts to the public, and in particular to children. The key to battling this problem is convincing them not to start in the first place.
April 2 is a nationally recognized anti-smoking day known as Kick Butts Day. Students and volunteers from a variety of groups will be taking part in various activities to help distribute the facts of tobacco-related illness. If you happen to drive by E.C. Glass High School, you may see a display with 1,200 pairs of shoes.
That represents one pair of shoes for every person who dies every day in the U.S. as a result of smoking. If this seems like a lot of work to make a point, it is. But if the program convinces a single child not to smoke, it is one less patient I will see dying of tobacco-related disease. And that makes it worth the effort.
JOHN M. SALMON IV
Lynchburg
An honorable peace
I would like to add some balance to a recent Letter to the Editor, “Making Peace.”
I am a Vietnam veteran who served two tours of duty in that country between 1970-1971. I will tell you that Americans sitting at home watching the TV and reading the newspapers did not get the whole story. Most of the other military people around me never thought that our cause was not justified or that the methods of fighting were wrong. We just did our duty, and we weren’t mindless morons who couldn’t discern right and wrong when we see it.
I still have family in the military, and in talking with them and others, I can’t find any who say the first negative thing about being in Iraq. In fact the obverse is true; they believe in what the United States is doing there and, as in Vietnam, the people of that country want us there. Currently evidence strongly suggests that we are accomplishing much in restoring national security, self-esteem, playing with the kids and generally being the best ambassadors we could have there.
Finally, if we want to truly honor the troops, especially the ones who have paid the ultimate price, we should complete our task there.
To leave would surely be dishonoring all the brave men and women serving in our armed forces.
BRIAN JOHNSON
Forest
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( Randolph Knipp ) on March 27, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Mercy, Cosmo! That was profound. And long! Now that you understand, does it matter? Anything matter? Does your expression of your belief to me and others matter? In reality, does “morality” matter? Your anchor appears to be yourself, and when you disappear, the rest of us will go “poof”, won’t we?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( molly brown ) on March 27, 2008 at 9:04 am
Cosmo, your intellectual and historical ignorance and laziness is astonishing. Only the most liberal fringe of scholars believe the notion that Christianity “ripped off” other religions. Most of those ideas were laid to rest by reputable historians in the 19th and 20th centuries. Only now are they resurfacing as an attempt, once more, to discredit Christianity in an effort to secularize the world. Historians, secular and religious, who have actually studied the evidence of Christianity and other religions have rejected the idea outright. And of course Jesus didn’t write the Bible; the NT was written by eyewitnesses of the events or those who knew the eyewitnesses. Why would followers of Jesus “hype up” his message, knowing it would lead to mockery, persecution and certain death? There was absolutely nothing to gain: no power, no prestige, nothing. As to your quotes attributed to Jesus, how do you know he really said that? How do you know which parts of the Bible to believe or not? Have you studied the internal as well as external evidence for the veracity of its teachings? As far as studying other religions objectively, I’ve studied them far more than you, I would bet, judging from your posts, because I do care to know who really taught what, and why. Shintoism, Bhuddism, Hinduism, Catholicism, Protestantism, Mormonism, Jainism. If you don’t study, you will never find the truth. I would suggest you read some books by notable historians.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( molly brown ) on March 26, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Cosmo, since you consider the God of the Bible as a “farcical sky god”, why on earth would you call Jesus a wise man and teach what he taught to your little ones, when he was God’s representative on Earth? He even went so far as to claim to BE God, to state that there is no other way to God except through him, that he would judge those who didn’t believe and they would spend eternity in hell, prophesied his own death and resurrection, and said God raises the dead. So, wouldn’t that make him an intolerant lunatic in your opinion?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( JacksonPollock ) on March 23, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Dr. Salmon makes a strong argument to quit smoking and to encourage our young people to stop. He also presents a strong argument to eliminate secondary smoke from public places. Let’s hope that such a campaign as Dr. Salmon’s will convince our state legislators to look, once again, at smoking in restaurants and bars, and, hopefully, this time write legislation that is for the good of the people and not for the good of the tobacco industry.
On Good Friday my wife and I were going to go out for breakfast. One of our favorite restaurants was so crowded that there was no parking space, so we went to a “mom and pop” restaurant. As we entered the restaurant, we were hit by a strong smell of tobacco. We made an immediate u-turn out the door. We found a restaurant more condusive to breathing and tasting our food rather than have the food tainted with the smell of tobacco. One wonders if a reatuarant that is so sloven in allowing the dining area to be so environmentally unattractive by allowing smokers is not also sloven in their food preparation.
While enjoying a meal, I don’t want to smell the stale air that a smoker exhales. Disgusting and unhealthy.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( molly brown ) on March 23, 2008 at 9:04 am
How audacious of us, [cosmo], to think that all American citizens are protected by the 1st amendment right of free speech. Only your viewpoint is the right one, and obviously in your mind, the only one protected by the Free Speech Clause. I have the right to tell people that they will go to the “bad place” if they don’t believe the moon is made of green cheese. They have the right to say I’m crazy, but all of us have freedom of speech. I’m not sure where you get the idea that your hate-filled, discriminatory speech is protected but Falwell’s was not. Neither one of you are/were FORCING anyone to do anything. And, by the way, if you are instilling your values (whatever they may be) in your children/grandchildren, you are just as guilty of “brainwashing” them as the next person.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( JacksonPollock ) on March 22, 2008 at 12:20 pm
HORSEFEATHERS, Ms. Thurman! Mr. Gerson owes no one an apology except Barack Obama. Gerson wrote that Bush and other Republican politicians were different from Obama’s support of Rev. Wright because Bush, et al. went to Falwell for support but “didn’t financially support his ministry and sit directly under his teaching for decades.“ The difference is that Obama was a member of a church and his minister was a spiritual confidante, not just someone asking for money. Bush, et al. are pseudo-Christians (Christians out of convenience) who pandered to Falwell for his support. Not only was Falwell an agent of hate but a “john” who paid the Republican whores for their services.
Obama is not unlike any other man of great integrity in that he did not, like the Republicans have so often done in this adminisration, “thrown under the train” anyone who might shine a negative light upon them. Obama confronted the issue, and whether one believes his speech was the most substantive and elegant speech during the present campaign or that the speech was less than spectacular, history will show that at that moment the nation was given a challenge to face the underlying bigotry that pervades our society by all races.
That speech, for those who read it closely, represents the type of President Senator Obama will be; unlike George W. Bush, who has greatly divided and weakened our great nation, perhaps, beyond repair, Senator Obama is capable of at least helping to heal this great damage.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( dan ) on March 22, 2008 at 10:02 am
Good for you Brain! There has been alot accomplished and alot remains to be done. I’m sure Cosmo will have a very negative response to your message, but he is one sick puppy.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Punto di vista di paradigma ) on March 22, 2008 at 7:23 am
While it may have been ill-timed in Ms. Thurman’s viewpoint for the remarks to have been published when they were, it begs the question “When is an acceptable time to look at the dichotomy?“ When was an apology made for the hurtful/hateful remarks made by Mr. Falwell, even though he was asked to apologize? To glibly infer that none is necessary because they are from some perceived biblical standpoint is simply sandbagging the issue. There is not always one simple, single biblical viewpoint to all issues. Falwell is not the only individual or clergyperson who has made questionable pronouncements according to someone else’s moral standards. Furthermore, what, exactly, is the “difference between godly offense and human offense”? I think a great number of people would be confused about differentiating between whatever those two things might mean. That bifurcation is highly subject to extremely individual interpretations. From a more inclusive perspective in a pluralistic society, what is a godly offense to Osama Bin Laden may be different from a godly offense to Jerry Falwell. Gandhi may not agree with either of those viewpoints. Not everyone shares either the same religious viewpoint within a religion or even the same religion, for that matter. Claiming that one is the only true religion has a real and understandable possibility of being received as offensive to a member of another religion. What may be a human offense to someone who runs corporate empires (successfully or criminally) or who runs with the politically powerful while himself/herself breaking laws s/he helped pass may be vastly different from what is a human offense to someone turned away from honest need or is homeless or is unfairly discriminated against for whatever reason. What offends an ultra-traditional “men rule, women should not work, children should be seen and not heard” type of person has a high likelihood of being different from what Dear Abby may find offensive. Even columnists differ from one another about what they find offensive. The point is that asking only one person or group to apologize is not going to produce a satisfactory resolution for all concerned. We humans like to think truth is far simpler and much more black and white than it, in reality, is ... a product of our pride, collectively and/or individually, and sometimes our downfall. It is not unusual in theology or psychology for there to be a genuine need for all sides to listen to one another with open minds and closed mouths at appropriate times.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Randolph Knipp ) on March 21, 2008 at 11:57 pm
I cannot begin to describe the pride I have in the men and women who serve our nation. When I read a letter like the one above from Brian Johnson, that pride cannot be contained.. I salute you, Brian, and I and many others are grateful beyond measure for your sacrifice.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( poet ) on March 21, 2008 at 6:09 pm
I got news for you Debbie. Falwell was a spouter of hate and his legacy lives on. Does one need to ignore the truth because of a holy week? I say it without apology and Gerson has nothing to apologise for. The hypocrisy in regard to Falwell, Robinson, Hagee, et al, is mind boggling. Wasn’t it Fawell and Robinson that was blaming American citizens for 9-11 just three days after the tragedy? Wasn’t it the same hate mongers that blamed american citizens for Katrina? Icould go on, but you don’t call that spouting hate?
Report Inappropriate Comment