To the Editor,
Wow! Haven’t heard the letters page sound out this powerfully in a good while!
Enough has been said in support and in opposition to the decision to remove plaques that bugged somebody, so I thought I’d just offer feedback about the tone of letters criticizing people for disagreeing with the decision to exit the plaques.
My concern is that there is an unwillingness on the part of severe critics of Christian activists, both within and without the faith, to be honest about the obvious deliberate and intense effort to eradicate the validity of the Christian foundations of this republic. The brother who chided folks for protesting said he was “sick and tired.” Why? Because they protested something that you think is dogmatically essential to your view of so-called “separation of church and state?”
To disagree with them is one thing, but their point is almost proven by the tone of such ridicule.
What is the sin of the Christian citizens who do not believe that the plaques should have been removed? Publicly stating their beliefs? I hope that I never get sick and tired of a fellow citizen exercising the First Amendment, whether or not I fully agree with the protest message. That’s a sad reaction.
Some of the recurrent arguments seem open to challenge to me. If the “public-funded” enterprises of education or city halls or amusement parks or whatever are EVERY citizens’, then a different approach is possible from thinking we have to limit Christians. Let everybody express their particular beliefs, rather than trying to shut up Christians.
That’s more in the spirit of the Founders than this ACLU type of straightjacket neurosis about public references to the Diety as Christians understand the Diety on public property.
Mostly, though, this letter is to express gladness that citizens are debating weighty issues! That is very good for the community, state and nation in my humble view.
Paul Richard Strange Sr.,