Letters policy
We welcome letters, but please include your full name, address and a daytime
telephone number. We edit all letters for libel, length and clarity.
Send letters to: Letters, Illinois Times. P.O. Box 5256. Springfield, Illinois
62705. Fax: (217) 753-3958. E-mail: editor@illinoistimes.com
IN A SELECT GROUP
Thank you for the article on Rudy Davenport [Dusty Rhodes, “Radical Rudy,” Nov. 18]. Not too many men can be named both a radical and a gentleman. Rudy is in that select group. He is a citizen of Springfield in the true sense of the word. I consider myself lucky to know him.
Jane E. Ford
Springfield
AVOIDING A PAINFUL SUBJECT
Whether it was denial or the desire to avoid airing dirty laundry in public, Rudy Davenport left out one of the most important factors that could leave blacks as a “permanent underclass” in our society. With two of every three black births occurring out of wedlock (and often more here in Springfield), thousands of black babies are starting life with multiple strikes against them. This situation, which has grown worse over the last 40 years, cannot be blamed on racism, government, or the Republican Party. It is first and foremost a matter of people assuming greater personal responsibility and accountability. Why don’t we ever hear a community leader addressing this issue?
Dave Koltun
Springfield
THREE SIMPLE WORDS
Thank God (and thank you) for the “God on their side” article [Jeannette Batz Cooperman, Nov. 11], which has sparked a lively and long-overdue dialogue in our office about God, religion, churches, the Bible, war, prophecy, politics, fear, faith, and other issues of vital importance to our future. Without this dialogue, the divisiveness and distrust engendered by current events in the world and the blatant bigotry of some “compassionate conservative” individuals and organizations would probably continue to fester unchecked for years, leaving us all the poorer.
The ministry and message of Christ was breathtakingly simple and is oftentimes summarized in three little words: Love one another. Last time we checked, this included Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Bambi-killers, homosexuals, tree-huggers, Libertarians, moral scofflaws, proud pagans, and others with whom we may not agree or share lifestyles or who may not subscribe to evangelical Christianity as a perfect (or necessary, or even responsible) point of view.
Because it is a message of special favor, not unity with all people, anyone who preaches that “God is on our side” probably shouldn’t be allowed a pulpit, and any politician who makes this claim should be banned from holding office.
To use this kind of thinking (“God is on our side”) in support of invading Iraq (or any other nation) is every bit as confused and dangerous and potentially tragic as using it to justify flying planes into buildings full of innocent civilians.
Perhaps the “spiritual warfare” going on nowadays, as usual, is mainly between those who want to attribute their political or social agendas (or both) to God (or call down his punishment upon those whose ways they do not understand) and those who are content to let God be God.
God is walking with every man, woman, and child on this planet, now and forever. If he weren’t, we wouldn’t be here.
To worship him in any more limited sense simply makes no sense.
Dennis Darling
Springfield
HERE ARE SOME FAMILY VALUES
Haven’t we had enough code-talking about “family values” for a while? Those who do not “uphold family values” were once called sinners, but that term became a hard sell in ecumenical politics. Besides, it has a theological history that doesn’t suit the Sunday patriots — the ones who use the pulpit to proclaim their pride in America, having conveniently forgotten that of the seven deadly sins, the deadliest was pride. And who recalls that the lowest level of hell was once reserved not for those who place the wrong member in the wrong orifice but for those leaders who betray a public trust? Perhaps those who think that all sins are sexual should count the Commandments, only one of which touches on that subject. May we expect the godly to straighten out their priorities and push for an amendment forbidding adultery?
Here’s family values for you: In my family, we live on what we earn. Apparently this is an evil practice in government circles, where it is ridiculed as “tax and spend.” Put it on the credit card — that’s the practice of my improvident neighbors, 51 percent of whom apparently think the path to civic virtue leads through “borrow and spend.”
You think four more years is bad? Try eight more. A friendlier court, noting that a president may only be elected twice, might easily rule that George W. Bush has only been elected once!Would not a real “wartime president” call on us to sacrifice something, be it through gas rationing, a draft, or (gasp) higher taxes? Neither Bush nor his me-too opponent chose that path, preferring to risk instead the divine displeasure reserved for those who (in a quaint phrase) bear false witness.
Isn’t it plain that the fabricator of the firmament and Creator of all the galaxies has better things to do with his omnipotence than muck about in North American politics? Look around. The world is catching up, and we have squandered our American Century. Perhaps the Chinese will do better with theirs. I am an American citizen, and it pains me to approve this message.
Frank Stokes
Springfield
GUESS WHO LOSES?
George W. Bush says he wants to do two things in his second term.
First, Bush wants to reform the tax code. He says he wants to simplify it. But guess what? Simplifying the tax code — be it a flat tax or a consumption tax — will penalize the poor and benefit the rich. It will replace a progressive tax with a regressive one. Now we know why Bush wants to reform the tax code.
Second, Bush wants to reform Social Security. He says he wants to privatize (or partially privatize) it. But guess what? Some of the biggest donors to the Bush campaign were banks. And guess who benefits from privatization? The banks. And if there is a downturn in the economy, guess who loses? The Social Security recipient — the ordinary American.
If this concerns you, call or write your congressman.
Beni Kitching
Springfield
BETTER LATE THAN NEVER
I feel bad for the neighbors of Club Ten who had to put up with the loud noise and other nuisances. But also I feel bad for the young people who lost a place where they could gather and enjoy themselves. There is a compromise: control the noise and nuisances!
Control the noise by soundproofing and reducing the volume of the music. The kids can have their meeting place; neighbors can have their peace and quiet.
As for the other nuisances happening in the parking lot, a zero tolerance policy strictly enforced would work, i.e., one infraction and you go home, no arguments!
Dick McLane
Springfield
This article appears in Dec 2-8, 2004.
