|
|---|
|
Dear Editor, I suspect John Kerry's wife is becoming increasingly worrisome to her husband's campaign committee. In spite of being coached about caution, her strong personality apparently can not always be contained. After a speech in which she implied Republicans are linked to un-American activities, a reporter asked her to elaborate on that statement. Mrs. Kerry denied saying it. When the reporter continued to ask for clarification, Mrs. Kerry became angry, turned her back to him, and told him to "shove it". I suppose a woman worth so many millions of dollars just isn't use to being questioned. Granted, Teresa is no Laura Bush, but I can't think of a president or presidential candidate whose wife was this feisty. This is something to consider when wondering what her behavior might be like in the White House should Mr. Kerry win the election.
Bonnie O'Neil
Newport Beach, Ca.
Dear Editor, One Little Disagreement on Judge Marshall My wife and I visit your website regularly, and we often take time to discuss what we have read there. We were a bit surprised at the continuing request recently to call the "Justices" and ask them to resign.
I heard on TV that there is an effort to collect 500,000 signatures to put an amendment on the November ballot to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Could you please inform your readers of this effort and where they may sign the petition?
Before America became a nation, the world was essentially a dog-eat-dog world of survival of the fittest, full of wars, conquests, and torture chambers. Slavery was universal. For the very first time in the world history, a government was formed for the purpose of freeing the individual from his bondage and suffering under a tyrant's rule and for protecting our freedom. Dear Editor, Gay activists are clamoring to change the definition of marriage so that people of the same sex can wed each other. They claim marriage laws are discriminatory because current laws do not allow homosexuals to marry. That is an erroneous claim. Our country's marriage laws do allow homosexuals to marry – they can marry someone of the opposite sex. This is the same right given to everyone in society. But what if a man is attracted to a male mate and not a female? Ex-gays know what that is like. Some exchanged “vows” in same sex ceremonies, and are now living in opposite sex marriages. How is this possible? Although homosexuality was removed from the list of psychiatric disorders in 1973, that decision has not stopped all psychologists from studying homosexuality. Dr. Raymond Fowler, CEO of the American Psychological Association, asserts that reorientation therapy should be made available to those who wish to explore developing heterosexual feelings as part of every client's right to self-determination. Dr. Robert Spitzer's recent Columbia University study of former homosexuals documented that same sex attractions may be overcome. Ironically, Dr. Spitzer is the psychiatrist who initiated the removal of homosexuality from the psychiatric diagnostic manual in 1973. Thousands of Americans have left homosexuality. Many more would deal with unwanted same sex attractions if professional help were made widely available. Ex-gay organizations such as NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality), a scientific organization of medical professionals who practice reorientation therapy, and JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality) can testify to the fact that homosexuality is not genetic or irreversible. Don't change marriage; provide a chance to change homosexuality. Sincerely, Regina Griggs Dear Editor,
Kerry and Edwards have criticized Bush as being "divisive", and then turn right around and promote their own class warfare by talking of "Two Americas".
In an attempt to lure voters, these two multi-millionaires are saying they relate to the common man, but that becomes problematic when Kerry and his wife alone have five homes worth over $30 million dollars.
Most incredible of all, Kerry and Edwards claim they share conservative values. No way! Both of them are among the most liberal voters in Congress, and that is why the far left has poured millions into their campaign.
Maybe these candidates believe what their friend Michael Moore has so often stated: Americans are stupid. Well, we'll see about that in November!
Bonnie O'Neil
Newport Beach, Ca.
Dear Editor, In 1967 the Supreme Court upheld the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to "provide coverage of vitally important issues of interest to the community" and provide "a reasonable opportunity for contrasting viewpoints on such issues." It is time prolife and pro-family groups get their time on the air. In 1998 our current FCC chairman, Michael Powell, spoke to the American Bar Association and said, "The night after I was sworn in (as a commissioner), I waited for a visit from the angel of the public interest. I waited all night, but she did not come."The Week editorialized in January 2002: "Communications giants aren't interested in airing anti-establishment views. Thanks to the trend toward megamergers and conglomerates, they are the establishment. Ultimately, they answer only to the bottom line of dollars and cents, and (quoting Mark Crispin Miller, a professor at New York University) their 'big bosses want big favors from the state' in order to grow even bigger." Miller states, "While such a setup may make economic sense, as anticompetitive arrangements tend to do, it has no place in a democracy, where the people have to know more than their masters want to tell them." Sincerely, Gay Guptill Boston, MA |
 |
|---|
Copyright 2008 ©All Rights Reserved MassNews.com® 508-410-2087 |
|---|
