RSS
Home
Letters
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Re: “Watching fireworks from the national holding pen,” July 3
I am amazed that the National Park Service had the intestinal fortitude to prevent us old patriotic taxpayers from seeing our fireworks.
I don’t know the chain of command, but doesn’t the park service have a supervisor who might possibly be a little patriotic himself? I will be waiting to see whether our senators and congressmen respond to this travesty of justice.
Government critics aren’t public enemies
Re: “ACLU failing in defense of civil liberties at vital time,” June 30
Melanie Scarborough asks, “Why doesn’t the ACLU defend the innocent rather than the suspect?” Actually, it is when the “suspect” is innocent that the ACLU is most needed.
She cites the case of a Department of Energy physicist who lost his security clearance, and therefore his job, describing him as “an activist in [his] Muslim community and a vocal critic of ... U.S. policy toward Muslim countries, especially Iraq” because he is an imam in a local prison system and gives “fiery” speeches criticizing FBI treatment of Muslims.
Then, without any indication that the criticism goes beyond the limits of free speech, Scarborough proclaims that the man “essentially announces himself as an enemy of the government.”
Are all government critics now our enemies? Sometimes critics are our best friends, especially when we are making mistakes. And would an evangelical Christian in similar circumstances lose his clearance and his job?
South Dakota law limits women’s freedom
Re: “Court affirms South Dakota’s informed consent law,” From Readers, July 4
William Luksic, who praises South Dakota’s anti-choice law, is way off the mark. What the state’s legislature seeks to do is attack women’s freedom of conscience by imposing on them a view of human personhood that is unscientific (neuroscience shows that the functions of personhood are not possible until after 28 to 32 weeks of gestation), ahistorical (abortion was legal when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were approved) and unbiblical (the Bible clearly treats personhood as beginning at birth).
South Dakota’s anti-choice law, despite the oddball ruling of the 8th Circuit, thumbs its nose at the First, Ninth, 13th and 14th amendments and disrespects the rights of conscience of all women.
President,
Americans for Religious Liberty
Iraq war hasn’t curbed my patriotism
Re: “Americans have become less, not more patriotic,” letters, July 7
While citing our Constitution, Cargill Kelly seems either to have forgotten or merely ignored that document’s preamble. Last time I checked, it nowhere states, “We the people of the United Nations.”
Both houses of Congress gave approval for the U.S. to go to war in Iraq, remember?
Kelly then opines, “I disagree that Americans are more patriotic now than they were a decade ago.” Speak for yourself!
Washington
Freedom is core issue in Navy prayer controversy
Re: “ACLU failing in defense of civil liberties at vital time,” June 30
Our founders did not establish these United States of America to be an absolute majoritarian democracy. Rather, they established our nation for the cause of individual freedom.
To this end, they added certain enumerated civil liberties to the U.S. Constitution for individual citizens to enjoy in spite of majority opinion to the contrary. Freedom of religious belief and practice is one of these liberties.
The U.S. Naval Academy should neither cancel the prayer exercise altogether as a concession to minority will, nor should it force majority will upon dissidents. In neither case should numbers substitute for absolute principle in deciding right from wrong.
It always takes courage to “swim upstream” against popular opinion, and those having the temerity to take this bold stand should recognize this fact. They should be excused from participation in the prayer ceremony altogether, even though this stance may earn them ridicule.
The American people should also be reminded of the fact that our nation was founded mainly as a refuge for unpopular dissenters.
Lawrence K. Marsh
Comments