Letters to the Editor
-
@ AKA
Thanks for your replies. I've been off doing chores so its late and I'll try to keep it brief.
On your 9:08 note- you said something about being a single issue voter. Well I'm not that- I think the war surpasses a single issue and is interconnected with a multitude of foreign and domestic policy issues. That's why given a choice between someone who was for the war and someone against I'll always pick the patter. Incidentally, I thought Edwards apology for the war vote was enough because he seemed to be honest about it and eager to make it right. I don't think Hillary has show an ounce of remorse - I don't think for a second she was fooled by Bush and her posture on Iran backs that up. (I also agree that Biden is probably the most rational- and knowledgeable about these things.)
Words do give permission to violence. But context also counts. I've tried in my participation in these forums to highlight ugly sentiments when I see them- not all the time (I do have to work) but not trying to police language. I go after the meaning not the words themselves- pushing the hate underground isn't any good. Outlawing a word doesn't change a mind.
I'll have to quibble with your logic a bit on domestic violence- it was socially understood as a private matter, which you agree. But you also say it was socially unacceptable but the law had to catch up. The law caught up when public sentiment changed- due to the advocacy you sight- that changed minds about it being a public, law-enforcement issue.