Letters to the Editor - The link November 25 2004
Thank you so much (Fishwrapper, "I am a Christian, too," Nov. 18)! I am a Southern, Christian progressive and it's been a difficult three weeks. The re-election of Bush has made me fear for the future of the country while my normal refuge — the online liberal media — has spent three weeks airing vitriolic diatribes against me for the offense of being birthed in a red state.
But perhaps most upsetting is the co-opting of "values" and Christianity by conservatives, which has made me question what has always been (for me) the obvious link between Christianity and progressive, liberal ideas. I am also Methodist and have spent time in the last few weeks reading from the United Methodist Discipline to reassure myself that my faith is not contrary to my politics. Your article articulated my feelings much more intelligently than I ever could and made me feel hopeful that I am not alone.
-- Amy Gore, Atlanta
br>?I'm not alone
I am a Christian, a Democrat, a mother, a wife, an artist, and I live in Cobb County. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for articulating how I feel about this issue (Fishwrapper, "I am a Christian, too," Nov. 18). I plan on printing it and forwarding it for many days to come.
-- Tess Kincaid, Marietta
John Sugg: Thank you, thank you, thank you for your perspective (Fishwrapper, "I am a Christian, too," Nov. 18). I, too, am a Christian (and Methodist) and am extremely tired of the religious right's monopoly on Christianity.
-- Laura Scholz, Atlanta
br>?We don't want it, either
I was glad to read your coverage about Wal-Mart's attempts to do an end-run around DeKalb County by trying to strong-arm Avondale Estates into annexing the old Avondale Mall property (News & Views, "Consumer clash," Nov. 18).
I take issue, however, with your writers' insinuation that it's only folks "north" of Memorial Drive who are against the annexation. I live a stone's throw from the old mall south of Memorial and am firmly against the proposed Wal-Mart, as are many, many other folks "down here." There are a lot of folks of varying races and socioeconomic classes who don't want Wal-Mart for a neighbor. I also believe that Wal-Mart is fueling this "north/south," "us/them" division in a nasty way. The bottom line for me is that a mixed-use development would be much more preferable for that site.
-- Celeste Tibbets, Decatur
br>?Left, left, left, right, left
I laughed my ass off when I read your article "How to cope, post-election 2004" (News & Views, Nov. 11). The poor little sheep got duped again! Let's face it: The Dems never wanted J. Fonda Kerry to get nominated, let alone win! Oops, what went wrong? What didn't? You know that the only election the Dems care about is the Hill-Bill ticket in '08. Not that they have a snowball's chance in hell of winning. I do believe they will get the nomination and Hill will cow-tow to everyone and even sport a Rebel flag to court the South.
But, us "idiots" that voted for Bush will be no more fooled by her than by the last "progressive" to come down the pike. Let's face it, pal: You can't polish a turd. I beg, plead, the Dem supporters to continue to mock, marginalize and tag us as right-wing Bible thumpers and all-round morons. Hell, the Republicans won't even have to campaign next time. Karl Rove can just carry a tape recorder around and print the comments from the left. Poof, instant votes for the next round of Republicans. By the way, I have a suggestion for the losers who just can't lose with any grace: Continue to line up, march like lemmings toward the coast and walk toward Utopia, where the left always wins!
-- Scott Hanna, Acworth
br>?His first time
Yo, I was lookin' all over the Net for a review for that A Tribe Called Quest show in Atlanta (Vibes, "Re-'Check the rhyme,'" Nov. 11). I was there, and I came all the way from Orlando. Good job on that review — I couldn't have worded it better myself. I've seen a lot of live shows, but this one is easily gonna go down as one of my most memorable. Perhaps cuz it's my first time seeing them live ... nothing like seeing one of your favorite groups for the first time.
-- Collin Bryant, Orlando
I just read "Gay amendment redux" and I was very impressed (News & Views, Nov. 11). I have not once thought of the GOP having such a sneaky, underhanded and nasty hidden agenda, and I'm so glad you have contributed that theory to print. I feel personally attacked and am disgusted that the GOP feels basic human rights are a game, like chess pieces they can move back and forth. Nov. 2 was a sad day for all of America, and unfortunately brighter days seem as far away as the Clinton years of the past.
-- Jeff McLendon, Monroe
Scott Henry's article espousing insight upon Republican strategy cited sourcing from a lawyer for a gay organization, and three Democrats — two of which are openly homosexual — to the total exclusion of any GOP voice (News & Views, "Gay amendment redux," Nov. 11). Such is the proverbial shoddy template of the "objective" journalism Creative Loafing embraces, which saturates the editorial staff. And yet, CL writers have the audacity to claim other media are unfairly biased!
As a Libertarian, I recognize that marriage is a conditional contract regulated by the codes of society in the context of its standards, not really a civil right at all. For me, the insidious component of the issue was revealed by listening to gay acquaintances salivate over the judicial implication of the word "marriage." Apparently, more than the acquisition of attaining perceptual equivalency, it is the desired instrument to bludgeon private organizations and religious institutions into extinction via the courts.
With the recent track record of litigation, it is correctly assumed that any organization failing to recognize or perform gay marriages could be bankrupted defending serial lawsuits. With loathing of societal propriety pumping through their tiny, vicious hearts, gay activists would be given the means to continue their relentless assault upon the Bill of Rights guarantee of free association. Activist judges do exist and impose personal politics, exceeding their authority. The amendment in question was the people's mechanism to circuit-break such rulings. "Hatred"? No. Pragmatic protection of the Constitution? Absolutely!
-- Aaron Harris, Marietta