Letters to the Editor
JulieAnna
Published Letters: 31
-
Hey!
[Read the article: The Weekly Standard's "9/11 Generation"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dean Barnett just turned 40 on July 13. The army has raised their age limit to 41. It's not too late for him to become one of those he praises for answering that call!
-
Just wanted to point out...
[Read the article: McCain's selective defense of "traditional marriage"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The quotes you provided from John McCain don't send the message that he is referring to the biblical definition of marriage, he only mentions the traditional definition. He could very well just be referring to what are recognized by most courts as true and legal marriages -- those which are between a man and a woman (traditionally). So this renders your biblical references moot, since McCain isn't claiming that he wishes us all to adhere to some biblical definition.
Don't get me wrong, I strongly support gay marriage and realize that the candidates who claim they are all for civil unions, but believe the laws should stop short of calling these unions "marriages," are really only avoiding the issue. Because of the Defense of Marriage Act signed into law by President Clinton, gays who are joined by civil unions can still have certain rights denied them because their unions don't have to be recognized as true and legal marriages by anybody who refuses to recognize them as such.
-
Yes, but...
[Read the article: McCain's selective defense of "traditional marriage"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]From Glenn:
Nonetheless, there is no meaningful standard under which things like no-fault divorces and children from multiple marriages are considered "traditional." All of that re-defined what "marriage" is.
If he IS just referring to what is recognized as a "traditional" marriage by the courts, no-fault divorces and children from multiple marriages are certainly not illegal.
From Boy Howdy:
I know that if asked he would say he means "in the eyes of the Lord,"...
Anybody who raises this argument should immediately be countered with: "Then why aren't you out there actively protesting marriages between Atheists?" Nobody advocating gay marriage is demanding that their marriage be sanctified by any church, only that they be recognized by the courts.
-
Ok
[Read the article: McCain's selective defense of "traditional marriage"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]After giving this a little more thought, I have to say I'm in agreement with Boy Howdy. If pressed on the issue, I'm sure McCain WOULD back his argument with some religious/biblical stance. I mean, if he WERE to claim that his "traditional definition" was merely a reference to what is "traditionally" recognized by the courts (marriage between a man and a woman), and someone were to ask, "Then why do you think the law SHOULDN'T be changed?" -- if he weren't to raise the religious/biblical aspect, he would be left with the argument, "Just because." He's obviously pandering to his religious base with his statement, so I'm sure that's the direction his argument would have taken if he had been pressed on the issue.
-
I don't mean to be nit-picky
[Read the article: Pam Spaulding for Glenn Greenwald: Obama zapped by the third rail of black homophobia]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ok, maybe I do mean to be nit-picky, but...
My guess is that the political cost of throwing the LGBT community on the bus was considered a fair price
The correct phrase is "throw the LGBT community under the bus...
Ok, carry on.
-
This reminds me...
[Read the article: The Lawless Surveillance State]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was clicking some of the links you provided in your previous blog entry on this subject ("Our benevolent surveillance state") and found this that was in a Washington Post article linked to in a Corrente blog entry:
The FBI now issues more than 30,000 national security letters a year, according to government sources, a hundredfold increase over historic norms. The letters — one of which can be used to sweep up the records of many people — are extending the bureau’s reach as never before into the telephone calls, correspondence and financial lives of ordinary Americans.
This reminded me of something I read at the Capitol Hill Blue website several years ago. Doug Thompson, creator of the site, who lives in Virginia started noticing a sudden influx of government workers at the coffee shop he went to in the mornings. There were literally dozens of people with government I.D. badges, so he began approaching them and asking where they worked and what they were doing. He learned these people worked at a new agency nearby and their sole purpose was to collect and store the data of every bank transaction made by every single American in the country.
This is something that gets very little attention, but obviously there is much cooperation taking place between banks and the U.S. government, as well.
-
Hmmm...
[Read the article: Harry Reid's pro-life stance vs. Ron Paul's ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In the NY Times magazine profile of Ron Paul this year, author Christopher Caldwell on Paul: "He remembers seeing a late abortion performed during his residency, years before Roe v. Wade, and he maintains it left an impression on him. 'It was pretty dramatic for me,' he says, 'to see a two-and-a-half-pound baby taken out crying and breathing and put in a bucket.'"
I have to question the truth of his claim. When an abortion is performed, the cervix isn't dilated, as this dilation occurs only when a woman is in labor and giving birth. If the cervix isn't dilated, the fetus cannot be passed through the birth canal alive. Not even a two-and-a-half-pound baby.
An abortion doctor, no matter how hard he tries, cannot force this dilation to take place. This is mainly why people oppose late-term abortions, due to the brutality that occurs in order to remove a large fetus from the womb. I cannot imagine a late-term abortion being performed that would result in a live baby being removed from the womb, crying and breathing.