Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Some problem-plagued nations could ill afford to devote so much time and energy to a matter of this sort. Thankfully, the U.S. isn't one of them.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • Be careful what you wish for . . .

    The Right is loving all of this. Hillary is loving all of this. The non-stop attention given to Wright and Obama. They love it.

    And while it may well sink Obama's nomination, I think it might also finally create a true backlash against the encroaching power of religion in America, which is long overdue.

    The fact is, America is backwards in its conception of divinity. It's actually medieval. It's as if the Enlightenment never happened. Too many Americans believe in the inerrancy of the bible and its literal, word for word truth. And they can't have it both ways. They can't claim to believe in the literal truth of the bible and its inerrancy AND try to escape from the horrific implications of such belief.

    The belief in a god who slaughtered millions for various reasons ranging from . . . he got up on the wrong side of the bed that day, to being upset that not everyone bought into his self-proclaimed "universal appeal". That god actually called for the slaughter of tribes who believed in other gods. The god of the bible said that children should be killed if they talk back to their parents; that everyone should be killed if they work on Saturday; that women should be killed if they commit adultery; that people should be killed for eating the wrong foods or wearing the wrong fabrics; and that a woman should be killed for looking back at the genocide that god had just inflicted upon the Cities of the Plain.

    The extreme cruelty of the god of the bible is obvious. The insanity of that god is obvious. And it has obvious overtones in what some--especially those on the right--will justify as acceptable earthly behavior in his name.

    The Crusades. The Inquisition. Witch trials. The slaughter of "heretics". The slaughter of the Cathars. Catholics killing protestants. Protestants killing Catholics. The forced conversion, torture or murder of Jews. The forced conversion, murder and torture of Native Americans. The list goes on and on.

    The invasion of Iraq is an example. It's Bush acting like the god of punishment, the god of vengeance, the ultra-authoritarian, ultra-imperialistic god of the bible . . . while the End of Timers look on with glee.

    This is NOT a coincidence. This is a WORLDVIEW.

    The only way out of this dangerous morass is a true national discussion of religion, which just might be more important than a discussion of race at this point. Both are needed. One may be far more urgent.

    Religious texts once were thought of us vehicles for spiritual learning, filled with metaphors, poetry, allegories, symbolism and various forms of indirect "truth". They were not always taken to be inerrant or factual, or literally true. IMO, the only way to legitimately garner the best from those books IS to view them poetically, symbolically, metaphorically. Taking them literally DEMANDS that we accept or worship a murderous, petty, vindictive and dictatorial god that has no business being worshipped by any sane human.

    Wright's god is preferable to the god of the Right Wing. But both visions of god have destructive ramifications our society simply can not afford any longer.

  • Disappointed. . .

    I signed up for Salon.com after a time away. I've been reading articles and reading posts and I must say this is the most articulate item that I have read so far on the entire election.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are intelligent posts out there, but I can't find them among the bickering, 'gotcha' fighting back and forth that isn't even fit to call discourse. Instead, there are the same people over and over fighting or patting each other on the back and I find it sickening.

    If anyone asks who lost this election, don't just look at the DNC or the candidates, I think enough people can look in the mirror, if this is the best that we can contribute towards an incredibly important election.

    So devour thy selves. I think I'm going to head to the library and continue to spend time with the campaign of my choice and see if any of that works.

    I'd like my $29.99 back.

  • @Greenie

    Right. None of those are pandering.

    Is it pandering when Virginia politicians go shad planking? Or is it just traditional for politicians to show up in public doing mildly stupid things?

  • DanielGree

    Obama has told us how important he is to him. Wright has gone public with views, he presumably expounded in Church, that are riduculous, racist, anti-American and anti-Semitic. Obama is an inexperienced and unknown candidate. There is nothing unreasonable about the focus on Wright as a way to understand Obama and his truthfulness.

    Where were all the Obama supporters when the Media to focus on trivialities surrounding Hillary.

    Some of Rev. Wright's views may be ridiculous, but lots of people expound ridiculous views (Intelligent Design?). Big deal, unless he convinces Sen. Obama to prosecute white men for creating AIDS, which I somehow doubt could happen. I have a hard time swallowing racist, though. You have to consider the context in which this guy grew up. Maybe he's racist like a woman can be a feminist? As far as anti-American, I think he's pro-American, but anti-American-government. I dunno if you see the distinction between the American people and the American government, but personally I'm anti-American-government, too. I tend to like American people, though...generally.

    If you think Obama is inexperienced and unknown, why don't you go look at his record in the Illinois Senate? If you combine time served in the Illinois and US Senate, he has more experience as a lawmaker than Hillary does.

    I may be able to agree that ignoring Rev. Wright entirely would be foolish. But consider Glenn's point; does the relative importance of Rev. Wright vis-a-vis other problems in America merit the level of attention that it is getting? Don't you think the attention is a tad bit excessive?

    And when Hillary was getting the shaft, I'm pretty certain lots of people (Obama supporters, or otherwise) were complaining about our gaffe-driven discourse, and have been complaining for years...the media even has a script, and some people have said that this script will be applied regardless of whether it is Obama or Clinton.