Columnists > Mailbag

Mailbag

Issue: "Heresy trials," Aug. 18, 2001

Don't do this

The current discussion over using stem cells for research shows how treacherous slippery-slope consequences can be ("Pro-life cell-out?" July 21). Many expressed strong concern when scientists first froze human embryos but, because few people were willing to believe it could become big business, our concerns were minimized, even trivialized. Now we are discussing the next "logical" step of using those excess beings "who will be destroyed anyway." With rusty voices we say again: "Don't do this to these true innocents." - Greg Leaman, Oostburg,Wis.

How far?

If the government approves research on embryos, frozen or otherwise, we might as well take the next big leap for mankind and grow some of the remaining embryos to maturity so we can harvest their parts for transplants. How far can we go? - Jerry Shinn, Littleton, Colo.

Many struggle

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.

Amen to my sister in the struggle, Andree Seu, for "Future perfect" (July 21). It was a blessing to me and my husband to know that others struggle with these issues. - Juli Williams, Irving, Texas

No sanctity

After reading "Till death do us part" in the July 21 issue, I am convicted by the lack of sanctity our nation has for human life. I am outraged that Mr. Schiavo has successfully convinced a judge to remove Mrs. Schiavo's only source of nutrition. My thoughts and prayers are with Mr. and Mrs. Schindler as they fight for their daughter's right to live. - Tiffany Thompson, Dayton, Ohio

A question of motive

Regarding the article on the mainstreaming of Christian literature, I believe that the central issue is the effort the church should make to get its message to the world ("Going mainstream," July 7/14). As Christians, our position should be that the only price too high to pay for a wider distribution of the gospel is integrity. Those who hide their fear of losing their livelihood behind concerns about watered-down gospel messages are in the same boat as those who hide their desire for larger profits behind the drive for a wider audience ("Bigger idea," July 7/14). They both will have to answer to God for their motives. - Nicholas Cave, Lake Grove, N.Y.

Bear burdens

I read with dismay the story of Andrea Yates, the homeschool mother who killed her five children ("She seemed normal," July 7/14). As a pastor and veteran homeschooling father, I have been very concerned by the number of Christian homeschooling families who reject the church or have only superficial involvement. The church is to "bear one another's burdens" (Mrs. Yates obviously had many) and without that support the burden can be very heavy. - Michael Williams, Dayton, Ohio

Faltering human filters

As a former member of the Greenville County (S.C.) Library System Board of Trustees, I read with interest WORLD's coverage of Internet filters at public libraries and the ensuing letters from readers ("Faltering over filtering," June 16; Mailbag, July 28). I was on the board when it voted unanimously to install the filters in all our branches. After a year, we have been very pleased with the results. Although one reader advocated librarians as the best "filters," we found that this places them under undue stress. Many female librarians don't want to confront porn-desiring patrons, and they are often stuck with a hostile working environment rife with sexual harassment. Those who have a confrontation often face inappropriate physical contact, threatening e-mail, and pornographic images left on computer screens for librarians (and children) to find. Filtering software is an effective tool for us in Greenville; it has come forward "light years" since it was developed. - Randall S. Page, Greenville, S.C.

Drinking, talking, and driving

Regarding New York's new law banning the use of cell phones while driving, what right does the government have to say where we can and cannot use car phones ("High-tech threats?" July 7/14)? In New York, while driving you can put on makeup while sucking down a Big Gulp and eating a Big New Yorker Pizza, and turn your music up so loud that it vibrates the other cars around you. Use your cell phone to call your spouse, however, and you can be arrested. - Scott Layden, Brandon, Fla.

Begs to differ

I beg to differ with the theory that exposure to pet dandruff in childhood may reduce the risk of having allergies ("Puppy love," June 23). I was raised in a home with a cat, a dog, and several canaries. I had frequent sinus headaches, earaches, a stuffy nose and was a "mouth breather." At 55, I now have asthma and a multitude of allergies. My grandparents thought I was a sickly child. - Sharon A. Brown, Dry Run, Pa.

Comments

You must be a WORLD member to post comments.

    Keep Reading

     

    Double trouble

    With one action, the president offended both those who…

    Advertisement