Letters to the Editor

Uncompromising stands not healthy for country

I continue to be surprised by the tenor of letters you publish. Almost invariably they are hard-edged and uncompromising.

A recent letter, "Reasons not to like the Obama administration," criticizes the State Department for spending $630,000 on advertising. Right or wrong, surely President Barack Obama was busy on more important matters, such as Egypt and Syria. Should we condemn all presidents for money ill spent? How about the planes and tanks that not even the Pentagon wanted? Or the "bridge to nowhere"? Is that advertising expenditure really a reason to regret a vote for Obama?

Another letter uncompromisingly condemns all women who seek abortions, for not "just saying no." Branding all women in that position as "immoral" is unkind, and to me immoral in itself.

We all have our own views of immorality. For many years, our government has subsidized rich farmers and farm corporations with billions in taxpayer money. Last week, the House passed a new farm bill, with increased subsidies, but it cut out the food stamp program, which was always tied to the farm bill. Millions of families in distress rely on food stamps. A Tennessee House member, Stephen Fincher, a farmer who has received millions in subsidies, justified his vote by quoting from the New Testament: "The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat." He must know that there are millions of unemployed who are desperately seeking work and live on food stamps. Now that's immoral in my book.

Felix H. Kent

Hilton Head Island

  Comments