Columnists > Mailbag

Mailbag

Issue: "China: Caesar’s seminary," Jan. 27, 2001

On target, off base

Regarding "Glad tidings" (Dec. 23), once again Bob Jones provided valuable insights not published in the mainstream press. The article was right on target. I was, however, concerned about your cover illustration with its caricatures of the Supreme Court justices. The looks portrayed on the faces of Justices Stevens and Ginsberg appeared to be demeaning. I do not agree with their judicial conclusions, or with the philosophies that drive them, but believe that we should do nothing to diminish respect for their positions as appointed justices to the highest court in the land. - Gene Cowie, Madison Heights, Mich.

Outstanding

Kudos to Krieg Barrie for the entertaining cover of the "Supreme Court Choir." As is my custom, I barely glanced at the cover when I first received it, anxious to read the inside. But later, I noticed the creative talent that went into it. I laughed and laughed at Justice Stevens's outstretched tongue, Justice Rehnquist's larger mouth, the amazing likenesses of each of the justices, and lastly the three different colors of song books to signify their ideological stances. It was outstanding. - Priscilla Haydon, Wichita, Kan.

Disgraceful

We see you’ve been enjoying the content on our exclusive member website. Ready to get unlimited access to all of WORLD’s member content?
Get your risk-free, 30-Day FREE Trial Membership right now.
(Don’t worry. It only takes a sec—and you don’t have to give us payment information right now.)

Get your risk-free, 30-Day FREE Trial Membership right now.

I was very disappointed in the illustration that disgraced the front of the magazine. What a display of disrespect to the two other justices. No matter how I feel about their decision, stooping to that level was unbecoming of our Christian testimony. - Roger G. McCarty, Los Gatos, Calif.

Tongue in chad

Congratulations on your portrayal of the Supreme Court on the cover of your Dec. 23 issue. I couldn't help but feel that my bias was showing when I decided that both Clinton appointees should have been shown sticking out their tongues. In addition, it could have been called "Chad tidings" just to keep in mind the near-Goring of America, had not seven of nine Supreme Court justices remembered the Fourteenth Amendment. Perhaps an even greater service was your coverage in previous issues pointing out misinformation being legitimatized by TV "news" anchors ("Make the TV bosses sweat," Dec. 2). - H.E. Dale, Auburn, Wash.

4,000 more

Like those pastors profiled in "The half-century club" (Dec. 23), my pastor, Col. R.B. Theime Jr., has diligently taught God's Word from the same pulpit for over 50 years. When he started he taught 416 long lessons per year (twice on Sundays and Mondays, once Tuesday through Friday). I don't think he has ever taken time off except when ill. Almost every month Col. Theime still travels to Bible conferences across the country, but returns to teach twice on Sunday. At 82, he has recently cut back to around 200 lessons per year, but we hope that he continues to teach for another 20 years. - Mrs. R. L. Andrews, Greenville, Texas

Too quick

Andree Seu's Dec. 23 article,"Two kinds of people," gives a too quick, too judgmental dismissal of "seekers." Some skeptics, not yet rejecting God, do have honest questions. Some have already tried, as Mrs. Seu suggests, to "step into the circle of faith" and found it not at all as she describes it because too often Christians have given an example of bad faith. This article gives Christians an excuse to dismiss their skeptical friends as dishonest from the outset; we had better not be too quick to judge. - Rachel Ramer, Lynn, Ind.

Now is the time

"Two kinds of seekers" took a while to sink in because I was that type of "seeker" for more years than I care to recall. Trusting God with your life is, by definition, an act of faith, and so it must be for everyone. Sometimes, "I need more time" must be responded to with, "That time is now." - William C. Corse, Stoughton, Wis.

We can count

The assertion, regarding the presidential election, that "we don't know how to count" is clearly false ("Sovereign snicker," Dec. 23). I have worked as a poll watcher, election judge, or election clerk in some 20 elections. The errors in the first count uncovered in the statutory recount were neither unanticipated nor disturbing, nor did they change the result of the "historically low" margin of victory for Mr. Bush in Florida. The problem only began when the thugs who have taken over the Democrat Party were unwilling to accept the results of a lawfully conducted election, and deliberately complicated the counting process to steal the election. We can count-the question is, Are we willing to abide by the results? - Nathan Zook, Austin, Texas

Comments

You must be a WORLD member to post comments.

    Keep Reading

     

    Double trouble

    With one action, the president offended both those who…

    Advertisement