Featured
Debate
Is Debate About Atheist at BC Merely About ‘Angels
Dancing on the Head of a Pin?’
|
Our article about the appointment of David
Vanderhooft, an apparent atheist, to an important position in the
theology department at Boston College has continued to cause great
debate at that school. We reported in our article a study which was done
for the school by Dr. David Stephens about “comparative theology.”
A doctoral student at BC, John B. Switzer, has
written a letter challenging Dr. Stephens. The two have exchanged
letters and Dr. Stephens has apparently concluded that Mr. Switzer is a
“front” for some of his professors at the school who favor
“comparative theology.”
We believe that although this subject may seem
esoteric and boring, it is a crucial question for our entire society. We
urge you to read the debate. It is basically whether anyone who believes
that Jesus was merely “a good man” is a Christian.
Because we were at deadline, we had to stop the
debate at some point. If Mr. Switzer desires to answer further, we will
be happy to hear from him.
Concern About
'Comparative Theology'
We pointed out in our article (in the January issue) the concern
by Dr. Stephens and others about the College’s “comparative
theology” movement. He distinguished between “comparative
religions,” which is basically a study of what various religions
believe, and “comparative theology.”
Comparative theology, a relative newcomer at BC,
is becoming dominant, he says, and has a specific agenda. It is a method
of study more supportive of Unitarianism, of which Mr. Vanderhooft is a
member, than Catholicism.
Dr. Stephens says that those who support it are
“inclusive pluralists,” meaning they don’t want to offend anyone
by saying one religion is superior to any other. Their motivation is to
minimize conflict among religions, but in the process they end up saying
that all religions are equal, which opens the door to picking and
choosing among all the claims of the various religions. The problem is,
what criteria do you use to choose among these claims? Those in
“comparative theology” have established criteria, he says, which
turn out to be humanistic, i.e., human-centered.
Mr. Switzer disagrees.
|
Going Deeper Into
Catholicity
By John B. Switzer
Nothing
is more conducive to mutual understanding than a hearty debate! When
divergent opinions are aired in an open and honest manner, conversation
becomes a source for the discovery of truth. For this reason I must
take exception to the characterization of comparative theology which
was voiced by Dr. David Stephens in the January edition of this periodical
(“Unitarian Professor Continues to Divide Boston College,” by Evelyn
Reilly). With all due respect to the gentleman, I offer this further
commentary to counterbalance the incomplete and stereotypical picture
painted by Dr. Stephens.
It is not
true, as Dr. Stephens is quoted, that comparative theologians are all
inclusive pluralists. There is a broad spectrum that needs to be represented
in this dialogue. Some comparativists are exclusivists and hold that
Christianity is the only true religion while others are non-pluralist
inclusivists who hold that salvation is a gift of Christ’s grace as
it is operative even in other religions. A famous example of the exclusivist
approach is that of Fr. Leonard Feeney, SJ, who declared in the 1940s
that the archbishop of Boston was a heretic for suggesting that non-Christians
could be saved. The most famous non-plural inclusivist is probably Karl
Rahner, who pioneered the theory of anonymous Christianity whereby those
of other religions are saved by the universal grace of Christ which
is operative in their lives in spite of the fact that they are adherents
of other religious traditions. Rahner’s position can fairly be represented
as that of the Roman Catholic Church at this time, as proclaimed by
the Second Vatican Council and confirmed in the recent curial document,
Dominus Iesus.
Even among
inclusive pluralists there is a divergence of opinion regarding the
salvific nature of particular religious traditions. Very few would posit
the notion that all religions are of equal value. John Hick comes very
close to this position, but his ideas are far from being normative.
It is much more accurate to say that comparative theologians wish to
dialogue with their counterparts in other religious traditions in order
to gain two primary insights.
First,
they seek to learn about the theological and devotional threads of a
particular tradition from the adherents and theologians of those traditions
themselves. It is not enough to theorize from a distance about the salvation
of someone who is of another religion. My experience suggests that most
Christians who pronounce against the salvation of Hindus or Muslims
probably know very little about their beliefs. To engage in honest dialogue
and even to minimize conflict is not synonymous with giving equality
to all religions.
The second
goal of comparative theologians is to engage in dialogue so as to deepen
one’s own faith. As Christians, they wonder aloud if it is possible
to enrich their own language of faith by understanding how others speak
of their beliefs. For instance, a Christian might read the works of
the ninth-century Hindu woman named Antal who addressed her poems of
love to the god Krishna. Reflections upon her devotion and her expressions
of desire for the deity may be a fruitful source of insight for the
Christian’s own devotion and desire for Christ. In such a case, the
present-day Christian has not only deepened her own faith but has also
opened the doors to conversation and dialogue with those present-day
adherents of Hinduism who follow in the devotional footsteps of Antal.
It is incorrect
to assert, as in the article by Evelyn Reilly, that this approach to
theology has no methodological roots in the Catholic tradition. Our
tradition is replete with examples of comparative theological approaches.
No less than St. Paul himself is portrayed in Acts 17 as praising the
religious spirit of the ancient Athenians.
This should come as no surprise since the early Christians were
inheritors of the Jewish tradition of Wisdom, portrayed in Hebrew scripture
as the feminine, creative force of the Lord God. Parallel to Wisdom
we find the Johannine concept of the Word, which serves as the prologue
to the Fourth Gospel.
Even among
the Apostolic Fathers we find trends in comparative theology. Justin
the Martyr spoke of “seeds of the Word” which God had planted in all
of creation, even in religious movements that were not specifically
Christian. The theme was embellished by Ireneaus and Clement of Alexandria
as they insisted on the grace-filled character of so-called “pagan”
philosophy. Later, in the fifteenth century, Nicholas Cusanus would
argue that the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Islam and Christianity
were all to be understood as potential sources of God’s grace. Even
the Council of Trent offered hope for non-Christians who sought to live
upright and honorable lives. By seeking this, the Council insisted,
they were effectively doing all that was possible and justification
could be theirs. Since baptism was understood as a necessary sacramental
form for this salvation, the Council spoke of these persons as receiving
a “baptism of desire.”
My purpose
here is not to offer a full-blown treatise on the work of comparative
theologians, nor am I seeking to be overly critical of the comments
of others. The record needs correction, however. Comparative theology
is not a threat to the Christian faith as it is embodied in the Catholic
tradition. It is a false dichotomy to propose that one can either be
a good comparativist or a good Catholic. One can—and should—be both.
In the present Postmodern context in which we find ourselves, it is
dangerous and unwise to either ignore the religions of others or to
judge them in a narcissistic, uninformed manner. By exploring the ramifications
of comparative theology, Boston College and its theologians are living
up to the highest ideals of catholicity.
They are in a long line of faithful Catholic thinkers which includes
Paul of Tarsus, the Apostolic Fathers, Thomas Aquinas and Augustine.
Like them, they know that one of the demands of authentic catholicity
is to seek out truth wherever it may be found. To refuse to do so would
be to deny the very catholicity we hold so dearly.
A native
of the Mississippi Gulf Coast, John B. Switzer is a Ph.D. student at
Boston College Institute of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry.
He is researching the topic of Christian religious education in the
context of religious plurality.
|
In
Response to Mr. Switzer
By Dr. David
Stephens
As
a Ph.D. student at Boston College, Mr. Switzer may or may not
have seen my technical paper which was used by Massachusetts News
in composing its article. My paper has, I understand, received
wide circulation in the Theology department and elsewhere. If
he has not seen it and would like a copy, I will be happy to supply
him with one. If he had read the paper, perhaps his reply to the
article would have been more to the point, or non-existent.
The
issue at hand is the nature of Comparative Theology as it is represented
at Boston College. As my paper makes abundantly clear, the concept
that is developing at that school is that the foundations of Comparative
Theology are intended to be an amalgam of non-Christian and Christian
presuppositions in a pluralism that reduces inter-faith tensions
by eliminating divisive differences.
The
kind of “inclusivist pluralism” in development at BC does not
fit the exclusivism of Fr. Feeney, SJ, to be sure. Nor does it
fit that of Karl Rahner. A characterization of Rahner’s theology
as inclusivist is inappropriate. Rahner’s “anonymous Christians”
are by definition Christians who are known only to God, or are
otherwise and belatedly discovered to be so. Rahner’s final intention
is to be politely exclusive, not inclusive, since the Christian
Faith is deemed by him to be the true faith to which non-Christians
may unwittingly belong. The recent Dominus Iesus from the Vatican
is itself unabashedly exclusivist.
The
question turns on what constitutes the core of Christianity. If
defined broadly enough, of course, then the Christian tent could
be stretched to include any and all good people. But, that is
not the tack adopted by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria,
Athenagoras, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Hippolytus, Novatian
or Methodius. To regard any of these as inclusivist is to seriously
misunderstand and to misrepresent them. Even Origen, the most
philosophical of those fathers, warned that the Christian use
of pagan philosophy was not to make it foundational for Christian
faith, but to use it. Indeed, he even used the analogy of the
Hebrew Exodus when much of the riches of Egypt were taken, and
advised, figuratively, the spoiling of the Egyptians! Hardly inclusivist!
It
is significant that these early fathers of the Church saw and
defended the bodily Resurrection of Christ as the irreducible
core of the Christian message as it encountered the hostile, cultural
situation of that day. The bodily resurrection of Christ was an
affront to both pagan and heretical thinking and was defended
as the bulwark of the Christian Faith without which Christianity,
by any measure, ceased to exist. Irenaeus’ staunch opposition
to the Gnostics, who did not believe in the Resurrection but called
themselves Christians, exposed their claim to be false. The foundation
of his refutation was the bodily resurrection of Christ at the
heart of the Rule of Faith.
The
intent of Comparativism at BC is to make foundational changes
in Christian theology by the elimination of divisive differences
with other religions. To do this they must, of course, do a careful
and sensitive assessment of the teaching and practice of other
faiths. But, this kind of comparison with other faiths is not
new or special. The Church has always been mandated in its missionary
and evangelistic commitment to attempt to understand its hearers
with compassion and concern and to preserve what is good and acceptable.
What
is new to the Comparativism of BC, following the guide of David
Tracy and others, is the revision of the foundations of all of
the traditions, not merely Christian, through a theory of interpretation
through conversation which results in fundamental changes where
neither the original nor the resultant perspectives can claim
to be exclusively true. This was pioneered by Gadamer and others.
In that effort, the unique tenets of the Christian faith are up
for grabs, since they enjoy no privileged status in that conversation.
The Situation has priority over the Message, in the theological
Comparativism of BC.
That
which is most unique about the Christian faith is its proclamation
of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ as Savior for all humanity.
For the Comparativist agenda to succeed, it must eventually dismiss
the bodily resurrection of Christ as an affront to today’s non-Christian
world, even as it offended the world of the early Church. That
is the harsh reality facing those Christians who would opt for
the Comparativist agenda.
According
to the Gospel of Christ, God’s loving compassion for us in our
distress called for the death and resurrection of His Son – not
the relativizing of false premises that alienate us from our God.
The concept of Comparativism appears to desire compassionate consensus
without the crucifixion of opposition entailed in being exclusivist
in its faith claims. The way of salvation, according to the Gospel
message, is obedient trust in the risen Christ as Lord, and to
endure rejection with Him in hope of the general resurrection
of the faithful obedient and the doomed disobedient. It is an
exclusive way of salvation that has been and is the core of the
Christian Faith. It is a stumbling block to many, and to the Comparativist
agenda at BC.
The
integrity of the Christian Faith, whether Catholic, Protestant
or Orthodox, is challenged by the Comparativist agenda at BC.
|
Response
by Mr. Switzer
I am grateful for
Dr. Stephens’ thoughtful reply, and for the civility of his tone. I
have not read his technical paper that was used for the original article
in Massachusetts News. However, the point is inconsequential since I
am responding to his published comments and not to the technical paper.
In reply,
I can only offer the fact that his interpretation of the goals and methodology
of comparative theology at Boston College is very different from that
which has developed from my own experience. I also disagree that the
entire question turns on what constitutes the core of Christianity.
That is so only if one feels that offering respect for the other great
religions of the world is a threat to Christian identity, which it is
not. For the comparative theologian, Christianity is not on trial –
it is in dialogue. Mutual, honest, critical and open dialogue. While
there are extremists among comparativists (as with any field of endeavor),
they do not give the movement its primary direction.
Two disputations
remain on points of fact. First, one may validly claim Rahner to be
an inclusivist as I have, or a “polite exclusivist,” as Dr. Stephens
has said. Philosophically speaking, the point depends upon whether one
is asking if non-Christians are included among the benefactors of God’s
grace (an inclusivist approach) or whether one is attempting to draw
sharp lines of distinction between those who can be called Christian
and those who cannot (exclusivist). The particular category one uses
for Rahner, I suggest, says a great deal about one’s presuppositions
and prejudgements.
Finally,
I disagree that “an exclusive way of salvation ... has always been and
is the core of the Christian Faith.” That is a matter of research and
interpretation. To my understanding, there is a much stronger thread
in the Catholic tradition of universality than of exclusivism. In short,
Dr. Stephens claims to be offering lessons on catholicity, but his methodology
more closely resembles that of a Calvinist.
|
Final
Reply By Dr. Stephens
Mr. Switzer’s
reply is evasive. My “published comments” were correctly taken
in context by Massachusetts News and their meaning hinges on that
context.
Mr.
Switzer’s interpretation of the “goals and methodology of comparative
theology at Boston College” are, indeed, idiosycratic and do not
represent the published definition given by his mentors.
I
am not concerned with Mr. Switzer’s private interpretation of
comparativism. It is the published views of his mentors that I
have addressed in the above paper. It is the view of his mentors
which constitutes a serious challenge to Christian integrity by
its attempt to reconstruct Christian theology at the most basic
level. Mr. Switzer’s special variety of comparativism draws upon
that agenda but misrepresents even the views of his mentors.
Mr.
Switzer is determined, it appears, to obscure the issue in order
to blunt the reality of the challenge to Christian integrity that
the BC comparativist agenda actually constitutes. However much
he may wish to change the subject, the fact remains that the Resurrection
of Jesus Christ stands in an exclusive relationship, like it or
not, to other faith claims.
One
does not need to be a Calvinist or any other brand of Christian
to recognize that the published agenda for BC comparativism runs
in direct contradiction to the exclusive, historic character of
the Christian faith which affirms the Resurrection at its core.
It is precisely Mr. Switzer’s lack of concern about and understanding
of that fact that is symptomatic of the deterioration of integrity
now under way.
To
the comparativist, “exclusivism” is a pejorative term. They see
in that term the very opposite of what it means in the Christian
context. In that context, there is one God, one Savior, and one
way of salvation that derives from God’s loving compassion for
all of humanity. Mr. Switzer’s snide remarks about “lessons in
catholicity” and “Calvinism” are totally out of character with
the generosity which he claims to represent and, in fact, points
to the very lack of what he professes: an inclusiveness toward
other points of view. He and the BC comparativists have no lock
on what constitutes catholicity, and, if Mr. Switzer is to be
believed, they lack a serious grasp of what “catholicity” means
in the common tradition shared by all Christians.
I
am sure that Mr. Switzer has not come to grips with the issue
at hand. If he feels threatened by the response being made to
the published agenda of Comparativism at BC, he might well determine
what that agenda is, before he sallies forth again to defend the
indefensible. Mr. Switzer may find he has crossed a crucial line
in blurring, for his own purposes, the very essence of the Faith
he professes. His experience and words stand as a
warning
of what the results of the teaching of Comparativism at BC may
be.
I
suggest that in the future, his mentors may speak for themselves.
|
Many of these letters are
written about articles that are just appearing in this print edition
because these readers have already seen them on our Internet site at
www.massnews.com
About 10,000 persons read our site every day.
The Terror of DSS
Thank You, Justice
for Families
We, as a family, would like to thank everybody at Justice for
Families for the work that was done on our behalf. My wife and I must
have talked to Nev and Tom Moore at least 10 to 15 times on nights,
weekends and anytime we needed to talk. Thank God the Moores were there.
What the DSS did is a crime; they lied and made
things up, but in the end, we did what Nev said to do. We stood strong
and 43 months later, we are united.
So please let everyone know the Moores have our
vote for sainthood! Long live Justice for Families! And Mass News is very needed!!
- Bill and Donna Grey
Charges Against Joyce Morris Are False
We here at Falmouth Baptist Church feel that you
have done an injustice to one of our dear members, Joyce Morris. We have
found her to be a compassionate, hardworking lady.
Although she is beset with several physical
problems, she has given of herself above and beyond the call of duty to
the children in her care. We see the children at church and several of
our members have access to her home. We feel they are loved and well
cared for. The charges your paper brought against her are spurious,
unfounded and irresponsible. You should apologize and research more
diligently before you print such libelous things.
We understand that there are many abuses in the
flawed DSS, and we applaud your efforts to expose and remedy those. Only
careful research and reporting can give credibility to such endeavors.
Tarring all involved with the same brush is not fair or honest, and
Joyce Morris is a case in point.
- Dennis Clough
Falmouth
Editor’s Comment: I asked the author of the
article, Nev Moore, to respond:
“I do not
know Ms. Morris. My information comes from many different individuals
who have directly related to me their own experiences as foster
children in her “care,” as well as what they personally witnessed
being done to other foster children in her foster home.
“Had
I only heard these stories from one or two, I might discount them,
but not from numerous foster children who do not know each other
and were in the home at different times, yet relate consistently
similar stories.
“Another
source was the written report filed by the Visiting Nurses Association,
which included reports by different nurses who went into the home
at different times over a two-year period. The neglect and maltreatment
that they reported was also consistent.
“My
third source was from foster parents who had taken in foster children
who had previously been placed with Morris and related alarming
stories of what they experienced or witnessed while at her home.
“The
story of the brain-damaged baby is factual. The baby was first
taken to the emergency room at Falmouth hospital, then airlifted
to Children’s Hospital in Boston where he was placed in intensive
care.
“I
feel that Mr. Clough’s defense of Ms. Morris is well intentioned.
I must assure him that my story was not done quickly or without
thought.”
|
Foster Parents Form Association
I have been a foster parent for a few years. Though
I admit there are a few exceptions, we are a loving and committed group
of people on the whole.
These kids come to us broken, used and abused. We
have to pull them through the tunnel of darkness back into the light,
very often only to return them right back into the arms of hell.
These children are sexually reactive, anchoritic,
destructive and angry. We welcome them into our homes and lives to give
them some peace and kindness, probably for the first time in their
lives. We watch them grow, explore, blossom and become functioning
members of society. We do this with constant interference from DSS,
lawyers, court officers, judges and court-ordered weekly visits with
their abusers.
If you think for a minute we do this for any other
reason than we care and want to make a difference, you really should
explore further the world in which we function and I think your basic
opinion will be altered.
Do I think the system needs some work? Yes I most
certainly do! We are forming a foster parent association that is working
to make a difference for the children and our families. Watch for press
regarding MAFF (Mass Alliance for Families). We will make a difference.
- Foster Parent
Burlington
Editor’s Comment: I asked the author of the
article, Nev Moore, to respond:
“In regard
to the formation of MAFF (Mass Alliance for Families), I am excited
and encouraged by this development and invite you to establish
an open, ongoing dialogue with us as the representatives of the
real families.
“I
know that DSS does everything it can to create alienation between
the foster parents and the real families - God forbid that they
should ever get together and the foster families realize what
lies they had been told by DSS and the deliberate villainization
of the parents be undone! One of our goals is to close that gap.
We want to bring together the external collaterals who play a
part in the lives of these children, i.e. foster parents, ethical
social workers and therapists, law enforcement and the administration.
I think if we can begin to bring that about, we will discover
that we’ve all been duped.
“I’m
certain that you will also support our concern that foster homes
be regulated to uphold the same standards that we, the parents,
are expected to uphold; and that our children receive proper medical
and dental care, go to school and be treated with kindness and
compassion while separated from their families. Please contact
me at your earliest convenience so that we may collaborate with
you.”
|
Licensing of Parents
I have been reading
many of your articles related to DSS and CPS workers’ inhuman behavior
in Mass. I admire you for your courage to expose this agenda. Keep up
the wonderful work.
I read
the reference to the fact that “parental licensing” laws had been introduced
in several States. Do you know if this is a fact and if so, in which
states? I would be extremely interested in having this information so
that I might be able to pass it to some of our legislators. People seem
to have a hard time believing that the things that are happening out
there are for real.
I would
be grateful if you could furnish me with this information. I don’t know
where else to get it.
- Pat Strawbridge
Louisburg, NC
| Editor’s Comment: We will endeavor to discover
that information for you. |
Please Help Us Fight DSS
My brother-in-law has gone through circumstances
similar to Ken Newell’s since last December, with his wife making
accusations that have been unfounded resulting in a restraining order
against him. The DSS is involved; he pays to see his son under
supervision. Christmas went by with out his hearing from his son.
His wife has an apparent learning disability and
yet she is the chosen parent for the son. His wife also has legal
counsel funded by taxpayers. Donald had to forfeit his vacation in order
to have money to pay for an attorney.
If you could, please help us unite against this
injustice.
- Cynthia Mandato Eismann
Barnstable
Ricker Can Sue Police
Has Mrs. Ricker been advised about suing the
arresting cops and DSS for kidnapping her son under federal civil rights
legislation? Please, suggest this. Thanks for this article.
- Cathy Cuthbert
Linda Hamilton v. the Bullies
Weapon Would Have Saved This Life
One of my employees is at his aunt’s funeral
today. She was assaulted by a car hijacker while exiting her car at the
valet parking stand at a Los Angeles, California, shopping mall. A dozen
people stood by helpless while she was stabbed 70 times. Two
construction workers captured the assailant afterwards. They said that
if anyone had so much as thrown a purse or a cell phone at him, the
assault would have probably stopped. Nobody had a gun. My friend is
trying to explain to his teenage daughters that some people think
everyone should have to wait for a policeman to protect them, even if
they die first. They don’t like guns, or people who like guns, so
Auntie must die.
In Oklahoma, where we live, these sorts of assaults
are almost non-existent since we passed a concealed-weapon law that
allows responsible, trained adults to carry a means of self-defense. The
drivers on our highways no longer terrorize women or seniors who are
driving too slow for their tastes. Everyone is much more polite and
respectful. A lot of trouble never even starts.
Apparently your judge fears that Linda Hamilton’s
example might lead to a wave of off-duty RNs terrorizing rude truckers.
He might be right. My mom’s an RN and I’ve seen her chase them down
with just her finger. Lord have mercy, if she had had a weapon.
- Brad Jensen
Tulsa, OK
Most Attackers Pursue Helpless Victims
I enjoyed your story by Ed Oliver about the nurse
who was attacked by a trucker on a Mass. highway.
I am a veteran of World War II and the Korean War.
Since the 1950’s, I have been an NRA certified pistol instructor and
have trained hundreds of men, women and children in the safe, honorable
and effective use of firearms for defense and for sport.
While there are those who insist that the victim of
an attack has no right to destroy the attacker, it is difficult for me
to see how even Jesus would have defended the likes of Richard Speck,
killer and torturer of eight nurses, or the killer and torturer of Holly
Klaas, and on-and-on ad infinitum.
Yearly, over two million would-be victims defend
themselves with guns, though only a small percentage are forced to shoot
the attackers because said attackers are cowards who only pursue an
attack against the helpless. Most will run if the victim turns out not
to be helpless, as was the case with this cowardly truck driver who ran
when his intended victim, the nurse, fought back. An armed woman is
rarely raped, contrary to old wives’ tales. Police frequently are not
informed of these attacks-defenses, but most admit that it happens
often.
- Horace E. Black
Fairbanks, AK
Carolina More Freedom-Friendly
Tell Ms. Hamilton she is welcome to move down with
us here in South Carolina. We certainly find ourselves more in agreement
with her viewpoint than with the ever-increasing fascist politicos that
seem to find their way into every administrative and government layer
that exists up your way!
- Jay Urban
Ladson, SC
Truck is a Deadly
Weapon
When a driver “points
a truck” at you in an unsafe manner, isn’t that assault with a deadly
weapon? Displaying her gun caused the driver who was threatening her
life to back off. This seems to be an appropriate and non-fatal use
of a weapon for self-defense! The fact that the truck driver was charged
by a different judge with driving to endanger proves that Ms. Hamilton
had justifiable reason to fear for her life.
Judge Barbalunga
should be removed from the bench for the protection of the law-abiding
citizens of his jurisdiction.
- Gregory J. Scott
Alpharetta, GA
MA Must Be a ‘Hick’
State
Congratulations,
Massachusetts, you have matched some of the worst behavior of the deep,
southern backwoods, hick sheriffs and their cousin “Billyjoebob” the
judge. I have never heard of such egregious behavior even in the South
since the early seventies. Massachusetts will now be known for its new
hicks, as well as being one of the most law-bound dictatorial states.
- Jack Vaughn
Ocean Springs, MS
Was Judge Programmed
by Press?
What a twisted
society we have become. The judge was reacting as he has been programmed
to by the press. If someone simply sees a gun, it causes panic. Never
mind that the truck driver was using his truck to endanger Ms. Hamilton’s
life. That is not important! According to the liberal elite, the only
people who should have guns are government employees (police, military,
etc.). Now that idea should make us all panic.
- Ken Martin
| Editor’s Comment: We are told that the daily
newspaper in Pittsfield, the Berkshire Eagle, refused to let its
reporter attend the trial. |
Judge Barbalunga is
Anti-American
I’d like to say
that Judge Alfred A. Barbalunga is a disgrace. It is our right to keep
and bear arms. Linda Hamilton even had a legal permit (which is absurd
in the first place, given that the Second Amendment is the only permit
we need).
It is people
like Barbalunga who are ripping the country apart, stealing our freedoms
and trampling our rights.
- Jason Westbrook
Austin, TX
Judge
Barbalunga is an ‘Idiot’
Anyone being threatened
overtly with a deadly weapon – a truck, in this case – who responds
by indicating she has the means to defend herself with a legally possessed
handgun is acting in a perfectly rational and legal manner to avoid
being the victim of a violent crime. A judge who condemns such a person
being threatened is an idiot and should not be in a position of responsibility.
- Thomas D. Cox
Muncie, IN
Barbalunga
Sides With the Bully
Regarding your story on the nurse who was convicted of assault
with a dangerous weapon, it is obvious to me that Judge Alfred A. Barbalunga
has no idea what it’s like for a woman driving alone who gets harassed
by a trucker. Mrs. Hamilton obviously had some reason to feel her life
was in danger. If she’s been legally carrying a gun for self-protection
for ten years, she apparently was not acting hastily.
So now
they’ve taken her gun away from her. What should she do next time a
trucker tries to run her off the road? Just pull over and hope he’s
a nice guy? Wait for the police to come along and rescue her? It appears
that she was doing the responsible thing in preparing to protect herself,
and now that option has been taken away. One more victim is weakened
even further, and one more bully learns that he can get away with it.
- Virginia Youmans
TN
Other Interests
Cape Cod Paints Rosy Picture of Hospital
Papers are shy about giving hospitals bad press not
only in Boston, but on Cape Cod too. You’ll never see an article in
the Cape Cod Times that isn’t positive about the hospital, even though
if you talk to folks that have stayed there, they sure have mixed
reviews. I know that the hospital is a very big advertiser on the Cape.
Maybe this is why the Times will also seldom do pro alternative-health
stories.
- Malcolm Woody
E. Harwich
Scouts Have Rights Within Guidelines
I was reading you article about Boy Scouts possibly
being banned from public schools. I would like to point out that
students are given certain rights in Massachusetts. They have the right
to distribute any information they want as long as it adheres to certain
guidelines. These guidelines can be found in the Massachusetts Handbook
of Student Rights. In essence, students belonging to the KKK would be
able to distribute any information they wanted to. I enjoy your
publication. It is sad that you would publish an article without
double-checking students’ rights.
- Seth Lawrence
| Editor’s Comment: Thank you for telling us you
enjoy our paper. If you read our story about the
Scouts in this issue, you will discover that it is not true
that the KKK would have to be allowed in the schools. There is a
lot of confusion out there about this. Perhaps this article will
help to end it. |
Gay/Straight Alliance Brainwashes Kids
Last night my wife and I were horrified to find
that apparently some teacher at our children’s high school is
recruiting children into this gay protection club (GSA). Our children
were planning on attending some rally in Boston very soon to protest the
treatment of gays here in the state. They had in their possession small
yellow membership cards that could be used to be excused from classroom
activities to attend GSA sponsored events and a paper flier describing
the rally and dance that they were being recruited for, including the
required amount of money needed for this event, $25-$30 each.
How can any school board allow this type of
brainwashing of our children? The reason this GSA has been started,
according to our children, is because recently there have been several
gay-related beatings in the school of (alleged) gays by (alleged)
straights, and this club will be a support group for the at-risk gays.
Where can we turn for help on this? Any ideas are
welcome, as we are at our wits end.
- Mark Gray
Wrentham
|
Editor’s Comment: Many parents are joining the
Parents Rights Coalition, PO Box 175, Newton 02466 or 781-899-4905. This
is a volunteer organization.
|
Vouchers Benefit Public
Schools
Nothing is simple
about education, including vouchers. But how can we be so simple as
to blindly accept the standard objection that “vouchers drain funds
from failing schools at the very moment when schools need these resources
the most.” (Rep. Richard Gephardt, January 28, 2001, Sunday Globe.)
What about
the financial impact of students who would take the vouchers and leave
the failing school, thus reducing the number of students who remain
to be taught? I have heard dollar values for vouchers ranging from $1,500
to $2,500. I have also heard that we spend from $5,000 to $10,000 annually
for the average public school student. So let’s consider a worst case
scenario using these ranges of figures. Assume we have a failing school
with 100 students where we are spending $5,000 per student per year.
And we allow 25 of these students to leave giving them vouchers for
$2,500 each. We have reduced our school budget from $500,000 for 100
students to $437,500 for 75 students. We have actually increased our
per-student spending in this failing school from $5,000 to $5,833 or
17%.
Vouchers
by themselves usually are insufficient to pay for alternative education
facilities. But they provide a foundation on which parents can build
if they are determined to improve their children’s education. Such parental
involvement is commendable and should be encouraged. School vouchers
could actually benefit public education while offering citizens a choice.
- Paul DeVivo
Acton
Gay Marriage is About Equal Rights
It was recently brought to my attention that you
are in support of the new Massachusetts Citizens Alliance, a new hate
group. I am writing to remind you that people should have equal rights.
This includes people of color, men and women, gays, lesbians, bisexuals,
transgender and intersexed folks and the disabled. We have reached a
point in history where some would rather go back in time to Reaganomics,
and to a time of patriarchal, imperialist, sexist, capitalist, religious
right and hateful domination. Why? Because people think out-dated
tradition is better than positive progress.
Luckily, there are more and more people who are
learning to think with educated and open-minds. Until heterosexual white
men, or white men, or heterosexuals in general learn to stop thinking
that they are better than everyone else, we will continue to live in an
oppressed and shameful nation.
I am 21-years-old and have fear for the future of
this country. I urge you to visit www.mtv.com/nav/intro_ffyr.html to
learn more about the generation that will lead us into the future. There
are many other websites available with positive links on the website I
have suggested. Please don’t further hate.
- Stephen Crowe
Cambridge
Clinton Doesn’t Make
Me Proud
I cannot believe that Clinton made anyone proud to be an American. Are
all Massachusetts Democrats insane?
- Stephen J. Tripi
Lexington
|
Copyright ©2001 Massachusetts News,
Inc. Photocopying and data processing storage of all or any part of
this issue may not be made without prior written consent.
|
