Winston-Salem Journal LTE SA 05/26/12

Disregard for the truth

The ad published on May 21, "Did you just waste $200,000 on a Wake Forest Education?" concerning Imam Khalid Griggs, shows a reckless disregard for the truth. We are appalled that an ad would even be published by the Winston-Salem Journal with such racially and religiously divisive content all in an apparent pursuit of profit.

Because the Journal is an institution with a responsibility for public trust, we see grave problems here. This is clearly a sad and inappropriate action and the contents of the ad are so blatantly false there is no way to respond to it.

---

THE REV. KELLY P. CARPENTER

BISHOP TODD FULTON

CO-CHAIRS, CHANGE CLERGY CAUCUS

Winston-Salem

Consider the context

The writer of the letter "Tenuous arguments" (May 16) makes the all-too-common error of using a Bible verse to make a desired point without any consideration of the context of the passage in which it appears, or the specific content of surrounding text, or other biblical passages that serve to clarify or define a text's meaning.

His contention that Ezekiel 16:49 specifies that the sins of Sodom were arrogance and not helping the poor, and not one of homosexuality as other readers have previously stated, is contradicted very plainly by the very next verse, which he conveniently overlooks, in which God continues: "Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it." Should there be any doubt about what the "abominations" were that the men of Sodom committed, they are clearly spelled out as homosexuality in Genesis 19, a chapter referenced by the writer himself.

The writer also takes issue with the description in Genesis 19 of the actions of the men of Sodom, calling it a "ridiculous exaggeration" since it refers to "all the men in Sodom" as wanting to have sex with Lot's guests. He maintains that this is not an accurate portrayal of how modern-day homosexuals would act, failing to understand that the issue with God, both then and now, is the sin of homosexuality itself. Practiced publicly as a mob in Sodom or privately by individuals today, it is still an abomination to God.

---

RICHARD CHASE

Pfafftown

We must watch that

It is proper for newspapers to express their opinions about public matters on their editorial pages. However, when an editorial takes the form of an imperative statement bordering on a demand, it appears to change from an opinion to an edict from a greater power. I mention this because of the Journal's overuse of the word "must." The imperative "must" implies that the Journal's editorial writers believe they stand on a superior intellectual or moral podium that compels them to provide proper guidance to the directionless masses. Some examples from headlines just since February:

Legislators must correct their mistake

State must show some restraint

State must find more of the victims

Berger must be on board

Issue of criminally insane must be addressed

We must address inequalities

Tillis must proceed on forming committee

State board must determine need

General Assembly must put public first

State pulled off a save but must learn from it

(emphasis the letter-writer's)

I believe, perhaps erroneously, that a newspaper editorial should be a dialogue with the readers wherein they can ponder and agree or disagree. Consequently, the word "must" in the headline affects me like fingernails scraping on a chalkboard, because it changes the tone from dialogue to self-righteous sermonizing. It is my sincere hope that future editorials will make less use of "must" and present ideas as dialogue that respects readers as the moral and intellectual equals of the editorial writers.

---

HERBERT OSMON

Winston-Salem

We must retain the right to use "must." And as to treating our readers like our "moral and intellectual equals," many of them, including Osmon, are on a higher plane than us on both counts. — The editor.

Word puzzle

The May 21 letter "A government diet," using the analogy of losing weight to explain doing something about the deficit, is like a funny word puzzle or logic riddle.

The writer says that to lose weight, you must consume less; thus it is with the deficit.

But you can't get rid of the deficit by feeding it less — you get rid of the deficit by paying it off, which means feeding it more. Which means more taxes devoted to paying it off.

Still, the puzzle was fun to work out.

---

BONNIE G. VAUGHN

Winston-Salem

Finish the Thought

Briefly complete the sentence below and send it to us at letters@wsjournal.com. We'll print some of the results in a few days. Only signed entries, please, no anonymous ones.

"The next culture war will be over …"