Just how bad can the editorials or the letters to the editor be written? How lacking of even the most basic understanding of human behavior can they be? Or, how well do they advance the viewpoint of most THR members?
Here's an entrenched anti:
*****************
A renewed call for compassion
Here we are, once again, dealing with another tragic school massacre. Every third week in April, from this year forward, we will mark two equally horrific moments in our nation's education history. The pain and suffering for these families is unimaginable.
As I have reflected upon the violence of last week, many questions have crossed my mind. One of the catalysts behind this was reading about Rachel Scott, a student murdered at Columbine High School in 1999.
Although she was young, she seemed to have a deep awareness of the reverberations within society of each person's attitudes and actions. Here is an excerpt from an essay she'd written in school: "I have this theory that if one person can go out of their way to show compassion, then it will start a chain reaction of the same." This is compelling.
The ripple effect of our words and actions have positive or negative repercussions. If we raise the tone of our interactions to reflect a deeper respect for the dignity of each human person, the chain reaction Rachel described can change our culture. The narcissism so pervasive will be starved to death.
Peace can take root only if we choose to be fully human and compassionately concern ourselves with the weakest and most vulnerable around us.
Mary
****
Awww, wasn't that sweet? And how special of her to "reflect" on events.
In this woman's world, there is no evil. There's just misunderstood people, people who will stop shooting if we can just all achieve this "ripple affect."
I fully suspect that, if her letter is read by enough people, I'll be getting spam emails tomorrow advertising the "ripple affect," and how Viagra can help.
*********
Here's another:
Effective laws, real enforcement needed
Are 32 pairs of "cold, dead hands" at Virginia Tech enough for even the Charlton Hestons and the gun lobby?
Much has been made of the fact that the young man who committed the atrocity in Virginia suffered from a mental illness. We don't need laws to protect ourselves from honest, stable fellow citizens. We need laws to protect us from the dishonest and the unstable. Even here in Milwaukee, we recently saw TV video of a young teen firing a revolver as he fled with an armful of stolen candy bars. Think of it: He was willing to shoot over candy bars!
Meanwhile, vote-grubbing politicians are willing to support any special interest that might give them a few votes. In 2004, Congress allowed the assault weapons ban to expire. Two years later, President Bush signed a law shielding gun manufacturers and gun dealers from lawsuits.
Now, it seems that one of the guns came from an online gun shop. It was shipped to a pawnshop to be picked up by the gunman. Maybe someone can explain what laws govern sales by online gun shops and pawnshops.
Politicians need to know that they will lose votes unless they pass effective gun laws, minus all of the loopholes, and then fund real enforcement.
Ruby
(Nice try, Ruby. Given that you were just too dang lazy to find out how internet gun sales are conducted, the rest of us can only surmise that your letter was published so that the Journal Sentinel can establish their "idiot quota" for the month).
"Even here in Milwaukee, we recently saw TV video of a young teen firing a revolver as he fled with an armful of stolen candy bars. Think of it: He was willing to shoot over candy bars!"
Yep. And, if he's willing to shoot at someone over candy bars, he's willing to shoot you over your TV, your wife, or even the pizza you just had delivered.
Think about that, but not all at once. We don't want your brain to explode.
After all, you now represent the Journal Sentinel's "idiot quota."
Here's an entrenched anti:
*****************
A renewed call for compassion
Here we are, once again, dealing with another tragic school massacre. Every third week in April, from this year forward, we will mark two equally horrific moments in our nation's education history. The pain and suffering for these families is unimaginable.
As I have reflected upon the violence of last week, many questions have crossed my mind. One of the catalysts behind this was reading about Rachel Scott, a student murdered at Columbine High School in 1999.
Although she was young, she seemed to have a deep awareness of the reverberations within society of each person's attitudes and actions. Here is an excerpt from an essay she'd written in school: "I have this theory that if one person can go out of their way to show compassion, then it will start a chain reaction of the same." This is compelling.
The ripple effect of our words and actions have positive or negative repercussions. If we raise the tone of our interactions to reflect a deeper respect for the dignity of each human person, the chain reaction Rachel described can change our culture. The narcissism so pervasive will be starved to death.
Peace can take root only if we choose to be fully human and compassionately concern ourselves with the weakest and most vulnerable around us.
Mary
****
Awww, wasn't that sweet? And how special of her to "reflect" on events.
In this woman's world, there is no evil. There's just misunderstood people, people who will stop shooting if we can just all achieve this "ripple affect."
I fully suspect that, if her letter is read by enough people, I'll be getting spam emails tomorrow advertising the "ripple affect," and how Viagra can help.
*********
Here's another:
Effective laws, real enforcement needed
Are 32 pairs of "cold, dead hands" at Virginia Tech enough for even the Charlton Hestons and the gun lobby?
Much has been made of the fact that the young man who committed the atrocity in Virginia suffered from a mental illness. We don't need laws to protect ourselves from honest, stable fellow citizens. We need laws to protect us from the dishonest and the unstable. Even here in Milwaukee, we recently saw TV video of a young teen firing a revolver as he fled with an armful of stolen candy bars. Think of it: He was willing to shoot over candy bars!
Meanwhile, vote-grubbing politicians are willing to support any special interest that might give them a few votes. In 2004, Congress allowed the assault weapons ban to expire. Two years later, President Bush signed a law shielding gun manufacturers and gun dealers from lawsuits.
Now, it seems that one of the guns came from an online gun shop. It was shipped to a pawnshop to be picked up by the gunman. Maybe someone can explain what laws govern sales by online gun shops and pawnshops.
Politicians need to know that they will lose votes unless they pass effective gun laws, minus all of the loopholes, and then fund real enforcement.
Ruby
(Nice try, Ruby. Given that you were just too dang lazy to find out how internet gun sales are conducted, the rest of us can only surmise that your letter was published so that the Journal Sentinel can establish their "idiot quota" for the month).
"Even here in Milwaukee, we recently saw TV video of a young teen firing a revolver as he fled with an armful of stolen candy bars. Think of it: He was willing to shoot over candy bars!"
Yep. And, if he's willing to shoot at someone over candy bars, he's willing to shoot you over your TV, your wife, or even the pizza you just had delivered.
Think about that, but not all at once. We don't want your brain to explode.
After all, you now represent the Journal Sentinel's "idiot quota."
