Letters to the Editor
notthepope
Published Letters: 2
-
CAn you do good if you call doing bad a "sin"
[Read the article: I don't believe in atheists]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What does Hedges really mean when he says that "not believing in sin is very dangerous"? Is he saying that if I, as an agnostic or atheist or non-believer, think that murder is terrible and inhuman, but I don't call it a sin because that is a term which, if used as I learned it in religion class is a religious concept, then I become one of the dangerous "New Atheists"? That seems to be to be the logic he expresses.
And who defines that sin? I don't believe that homosexuality is wrong or "a sin". Others do, including those who claim to speak the word of God. So am I dangerous? The Christian Identity movement claim that god thinks we need to be separated by race and that it is a sin to intermarry. They claim to be reading the word of God. So am I a sinner because I think they they are terribly wrong to exclude on the basis of race and to think those not "true caucasians" are inferior? All of these folks claim that their religious beliefs make these statements true.And is it failing to recognize my sin if I don't say these people are sinners, "just" that they are wrong and their beliefs have led to violence.
I have always found Mr. Hedges reporting from war zones to be well written and, to me, free of religious "preaching". What he writes here will not cause me to avoid his articles. I don't really care what his beliefs in God are. But if he was trying to require me to believe as he did or force school children to waste time in an unwanted study hall (as opposed to a class) while classmates went to religious instruction, I would have a different reaction (of course that would not involve killing or jailing or exiling him). If that makes me a "new Atheist" who is as "dangerous as religious fundamentalism, then I guess I must be - and I guess I must be blind to that danger.
-
A few possible flaws with the conviction
[Read the article: Is Briana Waters a terrorist?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I am not sure how many of you have ever made the drive from Olympia to U of W, but 60 miles on I-5 through Tacoma and Seattle, even at 7 - 8:00 PM in 42 minutes is not like driving 60 miles along I-71 in Ohio south from the Cleveland suburbs at that time of evening (and I have driven both routes numerous times). I would be very surprised if one could make that trip in that time (one would have to be driving 90 mph for most of the distance - avoiding a traffic ticket for driving 90 along that heavily patrolled route is really stretching belief. I can only surmise that the jury did not believe the stated arrival time at UW. Hard to believe that any Tacoma area resident who has been on I-5 in the past 15 years would believe one could make a trip that fast. As for her being further along the freeway, once you leave Olympia, you are in Lacey, then Nisqually and the Fort Lewis area.
Does this alone mean she is innocent? Of course not, but before you argue that "she could have made it in that time", better to know the route.
Hopefully she will get a fair hearing on appeal (of course, finding the grounds for appeal, especially in the federal courts, is not so easy, so one should not assume that the appeals courts will right all wrongs).
I am not a great fan of Earth First or the tactics used by those claiming that mantle - I am also not enamored of mansions or giant vehicles (just try being hit by one - a normal car will probably be totaled by someone needing to feel "manly" by driving a tank). I know those smaller towns - the loggers and those relying on natural resource jobs and the frustration level many have from being at the mercy of corporations who could care less about their lives and which will use those folks to further their goals of unfettered access to those resources, tossing them aside when the corporation's needs are met. I found the story of Ms. Water's work with communities and workers to be the most compelling aspect of the article and contradictory to her involvement in this action.
Thus, if facts are as the article stated in these areas, I would have serious doubts as to her guilt and would see this as one more case of the FBI and federal prosecutors exaggerating the facts to get a conviction which will scare many folks away from even legal activities and protest. This story should also be viewed in the context of a good number of dubious prosecutions and attempted prosecutions in the Northwest which have occurred the past six or seven years.