Dispatches > The Buzz



Issue: "George W. Bush: Gut check," April 24, 2004


After the attacks in Spain, the note from an al-Qaeda ally linking Spain with the United States constituted an attack on the United States and on our president ("Waving the white flag," March 27). Despite the vigorous discourse that is appropriate within our country, we need to draw together against the enemy rather than practice the me-first politics of Sen. John Kerry. If foreign leaders have communicated with him about foreign policy, he should disclose that to the State Department. If he expects us to trust him as president, he must erase our doubts that we can trust him with other very sensitive information. -Bob Whitney, Yakima, Wash.

At least Neville Chamberlain sought to negotiate with Hitler before his proclamation of "peace in our time."-David Cadwell, Chattanooga, Tenn.

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.

It was inappropriate for you to criticize the people of Spain on your March 27 cover for their response to the devastating terrorist attacks. Far from a "victory for violence," I see their response as a refusal to perpetuate it. Would you also accuse Jesus of capitulation to Satan by submitting to death on a cross rather than leading the people of Israel in armed resistance to Roman rule?-Mark Nygaard,Fridley, Minn.

Cal Thomas's column ("Terror-ocracy," March 27) struck a chord with me. It was a reminder that the Europeans don't seem to be able to figure out that evil is evil and there is no way to appease it. You would think that they might have learned from World War II, when Hitler could have been stopped before he built an army capable of conquering all Europe.

-Josh Damon, 16, Atlanta, Ga.


I agree with Gene Edward Veith ("Identity crisis," March 27). We are indeed made man or woman and we'd better come to grips with it. It is just another way for mankind to throw out God.

-Doris Heyns, Cape Coral, Fla.

Referring to Ms. Bagger [the transsexual competing as a female golfer] as a "he" and a "man" only perpetuates the hate, misunderstanding, and prejudice against trans people. Please show them the same dignity and respect you would show any other oppressed minority.

-Sara Rook, Houston, Texas


As a long-time observer of the gay and lesbian revolution, I have found its twisted logic to be deceitful and self-loathing ("Crocodile tears," March 27). Homosexual unions are vain attempts to mask the moral decay on which they are founded and blatantly sabotage God's supreme design.

-Pete Bovenzi, Syracuse, N.Y.


Your report, "Mommy dearest" (March 27), shows that abortion extremists parasitically defend the right of a woman to destroy her child. Principles such as putting the self first and disavowing natural affection for one's unborn child induce the heart to be unfeeling toward life and personhood.

-Patricia Maurer

Ridgecrest, Calif.


Your article on South Dakota HB 1191 ("Every vote counts," March 27) reported that the bill contained an exception for health to "prevent 'substantial and irreversible impairment to a major bodily function'" of the mother. Unfortunately, the bill left the application of that health exception to the subjective judgment of the abortionist, thus creating a gigantic loophole. The "health" exception, as drafted, meant it could have prohibited no abortions. You also reported the prediction that the bill would not survive legal challenges. The U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed Roe vs. Wade 5-4 in 1992 and since then, one anti-Roe justice (White) has been replaced by one strongly pro-Roe justice (Ginsburg), leaving the Court 6-3 in favor of Roe.

The bill also repealed existing restrictions on abortion. This flaw could have left South Dakota with fewer abortion restrictions than at present if a court struck down the abortion prohibition with the "health" exception but upheld the repeal of current pro-life laws.

-Mary S. Balch, State Legislative Director, National Right to Life Committee, Washington, D.C.


"Compromising positions" (April 10) discusses the problems that will result if homosexual "marriages" entered into in Massachusetts are transported to other states. Massachusetts has a valid statute that prohibits that from happening. It states that "no marriage shall be contracted in this commonwealth by a party residing and intending to continue to reside in another jurisdiction if such marriage would be void if contracted in such other jurisdiction, and every marriage contracted in this commonwealth in violation hereof shall be null and void." Even though Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly has refused Gov. Romney's request to seek a stay of the Supreme Judicial Court's ruling in Goodridge, Mr. Reilly has acknowledged the validity of this statute. The situation in Massachusetts is bleak enough. Pro-family media need to report what light does exist.


You must be a WORLD member to post comments.

    Keep Reading


    Troubling ties

    Under the Clinton State Department, influence from big money…