I am on my lunch hour and I was just catching up on the letters to the editor from the weekend Hartford Courant. On Saturday, there were 4 letters in a row that are Pro-Democratic. If you would like to just go and read the letters, you can go to
http://www.ctnow.com/news/opinion/letters/ and click on December 6, 2003 (Sooner or Later, HPD is going to get you).
Or - just click on "There's More" to read the letters here.
Howard Dean Has A Biblical Vision
A Nov. 30 news article ["Voters Appear Split By Church-Going Frequency"] gave the impression that Republicans are generally religious and Democrats generally not religious. "How will people vote on Election Day?" the article asked. "Watch what they do the weekend before."
Far be it for me to say either political party has a monopoly on God. Obviously, they don't. However, the Christianity that many believe in is not in sync with the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons of this world.
Perhaps Democrats are too reticent about their religious convictions, but several of the candidates, especially Dr. Howard Dean, have articulated a vision that is truly biblical. Care for the poor, the sick, the stranger and the sojourner is a deeply embedded part of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Jesus' message embraced all kinds of people as he welcomed the left-out and the left-behind.
The word "religion" is derived in part from ligament. Ligaments are connecting tissues that hold the body together. The United States has been fractured and many of the gaps grow. Race, income, gender and sexual orientation have divided us. Gov. Dean's message is that we need one another and we're all in this together. That sounds pretty religious to me.
Van Parker
West Hartford
The writer is a retired pastor of the United Church of Christ.
America Needs A Real Hero
As a reasonably intelligent person, I have a hard time understanding why smart people like to play dumb.
Max Boot, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, concludes in his Dec. 3 Other Opinion article ["Some Liberals Still Coddle Dictatorships"] that liberals love dictators who hate the United States. He launches his argument with the story of a Depression-era journalist who, no doubt desperate for social and economic reform during a very difficult time, was fooled by the compassionate conservatism of Joseph Stalin. The journalist failed to realize, as Bill Clinton has warned us about the current U.S. administration, that only Stalin's rhetoric was compassionate. The reality was something else again.
Millions of people, not just liberals, opposed war with Iraq because it was, is and will continue to be a dishonest and destructive venture. Those people, referred to so hatefully by Boot as "smoked-salmon socialists," don't love Saddam Hussein, though they do in some cases hate George Bush and his Republican putsch for their dictatorial practices masquerading as democratic leadership.
It is time to stop worrying about who is worse, the irrational and immature Kim Jong Il or the irrational and immature George Bush; the vindictive and secretive Osama bin Laden or the vindictive and secretive George W. Bush; the deluded and grandiose Saddam Hussein or the deluded and grandiose George W. Bush.
Let's start thinking about who is better, because we are going to need a real hero, and not just some jacked-up cowboy, to help undo the damage done.
Ellen H. Wittmann
West Hartford
Civil Unions Aren't Enough
In "Civil Unions In Connecticut" [editorial, Dec. 2], The Courant supported civil unions for same-sex couples based on a statistic from a recent poll of registered Connecticut voters. The editorial stated that "more than three-quarters of respondents favored civil union" and concluded that those numbers should persuade state legislators to allow such unions between same-sex couples.
The only problem with the editorial is that the statistic quoted was not about civil union - a second-class status that only exists in the state of Vermont - but rather about civil marriage.
The poll actually found that 57 percent of registered voters support allowing same-sex couples to marry, and 77 percent would find it acceptable even if they didn't necessarily like the idea.
Those numbers should persuade the General Assembly to support full equality and recognition for committed, loving same-sex couples in the form of access to civil marriage.
Marriage's meaning and legal status are recognized in every U.S. state and in every country in the world. It carries hundreds of protections, benefits and responsibilities that cannot be achieved in any other way. Civil union is "marriage lite," recognized only in Vermont and providing less than a third of the protections of marriage.
The recent ruling from the Massachusetts Supreme Court states in no uncertain terms that it is unconstitutional to bar same-sex couples from marriage: "The marriage ban works a deep and scarring hardship on a very real segment of the community and for no rational reason ... The Massachusetts Constitution affirms the dignity and equality of all individuals. It forbids the creation of second-class citizens."
Civil union was not an acceptable alternative to the Massachusetts Court and should not be an acceptable alternative to The Courant.
Anne Stanback
President
Love Makes A Family
Avon
Love Makes A Family is an advocacy group working to expand Connecticut marriage laws to include same-sex couples.
Medicare Bill Was A Sham
The elderly made this country great. It is embarrassing that many elderly are forced to buy prescriptions that they desperately need in Canada. Now politicians have passed a Medicare bill that takes away more of the little money that many of these people have.
No matter what war or crisis occurs, nothing should come before taking care of the children and elderly of this country.
It also is unfathomable that Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman did not vote on this bill. He is running for president. The bill drastically affects a growing segment of this country. He wants to be president and can't do his job as a senator.
How a country treats its senior population speaks volumes and, sadly, America is not making the grade. The elderly need to be a major priority to these politicians. Many of these people are alone on fixed incomes and cannot stand up for themselves.
The real problem is that we have politicians who do not live like the majority of people in America.
Politicians should have the same insurance, health care and Medicare that they provide for the elderly. If such a law were adopted, things would change quickly and the Medicare bill that just passed would be unthinkable.
Mark Lewis
West Hartford