Reader letters, Feb. 15
Policies changing as politics evolve
To the editor:
Recent news reports seem to indicate a growing pressure on political, community, and religious organizations to revise their policies. The Republican Party is changing its former stand on immigration, and the Boy Scouts of America is considering altering their present policy of excluding gays.
The Republican leaders candidly stated that they are adjusting their platform because the political climate is evolving, and they would be losing more elections if they didn’t. The BSA leaders announced that they are thinking about modifying their membership guidelines because they are losing sponsors and financial support.
Neither group stated that they are changing their policies because it is the right thing to do or that such discrimination is unjust. Republicans seemingly would have continued their biased position if not for losing elections.
Historically some churches, civic clubs, political parties, businesses, etc. have made similar decisions to move from their discriminatory stances for the wrong reasons, such as the probability of losing members, elections, or financial support.
In the last presidential election, the Republican strategists miscalculated. They expected their loyal base to offset the votes of a host of groups who have been traditionally discriminated against and still are (women, African-Americans, immigrants, LGBTs, etc.). Those strategists did not foresee the younger generation overwhelmingly rejecting prejudice.
In future elections political parties will need to include anti-discrimination in their platforms or suffer the consequences. As societies become better informed and more aware, fundamentalists of many religions (Christian, Moslem, Jewish, etc.) are under increasing pressure to change their intolerant attitudes and their repressive behaviors toward women, homosexuals, and anyone with different views.
The Catholic Church must decide to amend their antiquated policies on women priests, contraception, and stem cell research, or they will continue to lose members. Various institutions, especially the ones controlled by old, backward-thinking men, are facing a choice of either (1) updating and improving their archaic policies to those that are fair and relevant to the 21st Century, or (2) being left behind. Hopefully they will choose the first, not for votes or dollars, but because it’s the right thing to do.
To the editor:
I don’t have anything to say against any of the fine gentlemen running for the office of sheriff.
The letter “Pick most qualified sheriff candidate,” however, was written by someone, that I bet, has gotten caught for speeding, or some other violation by the highway patrol and tries his best to give them a black eye every chance he gets. If he is trying to get Officer Wilke elected by writing letters like this, then I feel sorry for Officer Wilke because he sure doesn’t need this kind of help, if you can call it that.
I have heard that it’s better to be thought a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt. If it weren’t for the highway patrol, it wouldn’t be safe for you or your wife to go to work, to the store or anywhere else. It’s these young men and women that put their lives on the line every day to keep our roads safe. Would you rather for the drugs to be sold to your family’s children because we had no one out there to stop them from coming in? Maybe your wife goes shopping in Asheville and gets hit and killed by a speeding driver or a drunk driver and he walks away? So don’t put down the North Carolina Highway Patrol, You really don’t know what your talking about.
Oh, by the way, Greg Christopher, you have my support, even more so now.
Danny C. Jones