It is incredibly late in the game, but suffice to say I have no problem with the notion that Bush & Co. are criminals. There are a number of parallels between Bush and the Chilean dictator Pinochet, for instance. The question I don't have the expertise to answer is whether the doors of Article III courts are open to non-citizens detained at Gitmo. The answer is of course yes, but I haven't unpacked Kennedy's opinion sufficiently to determine the precedent he used to justify himself. There are at least two cases where the courts weren't open, Eisentrager and McCardell. McCardell is a Civil War case where jurisdiction was stripped by Congress, and the court accepted it. I was overjoyed at the ruling, and I am sure the answer is buried in the opinion somewhere, just haven't had the chance to read it yet.

Any president would have sought to avoid classifying captured suspected terrorists as POWs. Under the Geneva conventions, the only information you can get from POWs are name, rank, and serial number, and our military needs to be able to interrogate suspected terrorists. What the Bush administration has done that is radical is to try to claim that suspected terrorists have no rights under Geneva common article 3, the ICCPR, the Convention Against Torture, etc. The tortured reasoning that they employ to get around human rights obligations is pretty absurd, and is not considered legitimate by the majority of the world outside the US. Of course, the Bush administration has nothing but contempt for the international community. More and more, the rest of the world is responding in kind.

Seth Rogen is about 25, younger than myself, and has written, done voice work, and starred in several movies. He is probably quite rich. But of course he smokes weed so that is a pure case of arrested development, and he will never amount to anything. Sort of like me. I mean, I am in law school, and in the top 10% of my class, but every time I smoke a bowl it makes me want to move to a trailer park and apply for welfare. All my classmates with C averages who go get blackout drunk every weekend, they are the salt of the earth types.

I was raised evangelical and remain a conservative Christian (theologically, not socially...it would take entirely too long to explain). I thought Obama did quite well, and it seems the crowd was receptive, or at least polite. I think a lot of younger Christians will vote for Obama, and I hope a few older ones do as well, although I would probably have a better feel for the subject if I were still in Grand Rapids instead of hanging out with the heathens in Boston.

Also, he had very little to lose and a lot to gain by going to the forum. I don't think he will regret it.

He does not speak for all Evangelicals, and he certainly does not speak for all Christians. I grew up in the Midwest and got an incredible spiritual education at a conservative church. I am appalled by the policies advanced by McCain and the Bush administration BECAUSE I am a Christian. I am certainly not the only person who feels this way. The Republican party has lost a lot of ground with the church and will continue to as long as they act without any regard for basic morality (I am speaking generally here, and not implying that every Republican in the country is morally bankrupt).

This is not to say that I have any illusions that one candidate or the other is more "Christian." I simply find Obama's policies and rhetoric more in line with my sense of morality, which is based on my understanding of the Bible, both from personal study and the teachings of genuinely conservative ministers such as my father.

The story of the rich young ruler, starting at Mark 10.17 (NIV):

As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good - except God alone. You know the commandments: 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.'"

"Teacher," he declared, "all of these I have kept since I was a boy."

Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.

Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!"

The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

Have we ever had a president who was not rich? Were our founding fathers not rich men? Are we not taught, even in American churches, that God wants us to have wealth? Anyone who thinks America is God's nation or a Christian nation is deluded.

To reinforce: "No man can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be decoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." (Matthew 6.24)

With articles and letters like these, Salon is rapidly surpassing The Onion as my go-to comedy website! Keep up the "good" work! And keep writing those "insightful" letters, everyone!