Letters to the Editor
meanbobmean
Published Letters: 25 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Could we wait an hour maybe?
[Read the article: White House and guns: Stay the course]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I certainly think an intelligent dialogue about gun control is criticial, but trying to bash anyone, even a doofus like Bush, through his spokesperson immediately after a tragedy of this nature, I mean the same day within a few hours, is infantile. I know we all have agendas, I certainly do, but can't we be somewhat decent about them 10% of the time?
The question asked was out of place and Salon pandering to it is beneath the dignity of anyone trying to get more out of life than we are currently being spoon fed by the body politic.
Yours,
MeanBobMean
-
Utah Not one of th Dodgers
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'd like to point out that my Utes have lined up Oregon State (10-4 last year), UCLA, and Louisville for three non conference games. No Nancy Girl schedule that. Our breather is in conference. We also play the Aggies (Utah State) because it's for the Beehive Boot (envy is not beneficial, please admire us only!).
Last season it was UCLA, Boise State and one non opponent: Northern Arizona (Go Lumberjacks!).
While Kaufman's points are reasonable, the converse is also true that if you want to improve you have to schedule tougher leagues on your own schedule or you will never be anything but an "Oh by the way". And if teams won't take on UCLA, or Oklahoma, or Michigan (Utah has UM next season!), then the "haves" cannot be blamed for only playing patsies wishing to bolster economies by millions.
And if the Utahs and TCUs and Boise States don't go out and knock off Ohio State and Florida occasionally, why is there any incentive for a kid to go to Utah?
And do any of us feel that at anytime the system of haves and have nots will change, or that Michigan Vs. Texas weekly would change it? The idea that you could somehow overcome a financial juggernaut like the entrenched interests in college football is quixotic, perhaps we could take money out of the game entirely?
Mean Bob Mean
-
Poorly Rendered Picks
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No mention of gay marriage initiatives, nothing on the Iraqi war, and the correlation of presidential debates and contender hometowns to victories analysis?
Absent!
Bah!
Why, we may as well read tea leaves.
Mean Bob Mean
-
Why the Catcalling?
[Read the article: The Mormons are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First, thanks for this excellent piece. Well written and a serious attempt to be objective as possible. I am a practicing member of the LDS Church.
I have to ask some of your readers: Why all the hatred and catcalling? Can't we read a timely, well-researched and written piece about Mormonism without descending into broad, and aimless attacks on the LDS or on all religions generally? I think it shows that the old biases and unthinking fear of are still with us.
The LDS faith has an extremely intelligent apologetic, one that won't be overcome by taunting or by the tantrum inclined. There has been some fantastic scholarship in terms of doctrine and people who sneer at it do so at the peril of their own intellectual credentials. [An aside of the modern kind: I too am not interested in archeologic proof.] One of our intellects, a man named Henry Eyring (an eminent physicist in the 1920s-1940s as I recall) said that "Being Mormon does not mean I have to believe everything, just that which is true."
Would that others had as enlightened a philosophy centered entirely in epistemic knowledge as determined by the self (quite a few parallels to atheist beliefs there).
Like Atheism, Mormonism is a belief, one which has a rich history that parallels a great many human experiences.
As for whether or not the unique and specific claims of the Mormons can be verified by an individual, the LDS suggest that people read the book of Mormon for themselves and make up their own minds. Whether you join or not is not as important as the exercise of your own agency in the matter, but that agency should be exercised from a position of knowledge, not one of ignorance. I don't see that as terribly frightening or anti-intellectual. A great deal of our doctrine and philosophy revolve around free agency and the responsibility of the individual in the world. Is that a bad thing?
So many caricatures of the LDS are drawn from the marginal members, or as they are called "Jack" Mormons. If such a caricature of say Judah was drawn in these readers' letters, our disgust would be manifest swiftly I am sure.
Keep an open mind folks, we have our weak caricatures of members, but the vast majority are extremely bright and good people with far more open minds than were demonstrated in some of these responses.
Thanks again for a well written and interesting read.
Mean Bob Mean
-
Membership in the Church
[Read the article: The Mormons are coming]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Anonymous Wrote:
Do not put much stock in membership numbers put out by the Mormon church. They are wildly inflated as they include many people who are no longer active members. It is a huge pain to get your name taken off the offficial rolls so very few make the effort to do so despite a significant number of them leaving active participation in the religion.
To which I would note:
There are a great many inactive members,this does in fact inflate membership rolls, but I would not assume all want their names removed. Also, it's simply false that it is difficult to have one's name removed from Church rolls. I work as a clerk in the Church, this is inaccurate. Simply write your bishop or stake president a short letter demanding same and it's done, and I've never seen it take long.
Mean Bob Mean