Readers' viewsDumb to pull Robertson for personal beliefs
So Phil Robertson has been suspended indefinitely from A&E. Saw that one coming. I was just wondering when a secular television network was going to finally be fed up with this God-loving man, whose Christian family has raked in so much money for them over the past four seasons of being America's number one reality show.
It was a dumb move to suspend Robertson for saying something off the show that had nothing to do with Duck Dynasty or A&E. It was his own personal beliefs. Celebrities do it every day to support their own twisted and immoral beliefs, why can't a God-fearing man do the same? Carrie Underwood, an avowed Christian was praised for supporting marriage equality last year, which goes against the beliefs of millions of people who support traditional marriage. I find it amazing that the 3 percent of the U.S. population who actually are gay seem to have such a dominant grip on the entertainment industry.
I just wish someone on the other side would please explain to me why they are so intolerant of other people's views. Even if it's just for the novelty of it. Supporters of the homosexuality movement have advanced their cause more with intolerance than with logic, reason, or argument. They act more like bratty little children whose feelings get hurt over the smallest little nothing comment.
Never miss a local story.
Phil Robertson spoke the truth, and sometimes the truth hurts people.
When will the self-righteous, bigoted, hate- filled prudes finally get it? When Phil Robertson and his ilk quote the Bible about homosexuals, it is just a way to be self-righteous while condemning people who are different from themselves. To claim, as Robertson did, that a man interested in sex ought to prefer the orifice of one sex over another is patently prejudicial.
That is just the beginning of the bigotry and hypocrisy of people like him. When they condemn adultery, it is merely an attempt to tell other married people how to live their lives. When they condemn embezzlement, they add to the oppression of workers who are exploited by big corporations. When they call someone a liar, like President Obama for his comments about the new health insurance law, it is nothing but a way to arrogantly claim that they alone have the truth.
These bigots really like to condemn sex. People who enjoy cohabitation are called by the hateful word "fornicators." Their condemnation of abortion is a sneaky way to make war on women. When they oppose gaming, which could raise millions of tax dollars, what they are really doing is trying to deny our children a decent education.
They appear super-righteous when they condemn racism, sexism and ageism. But this is nothing more than a way to make themselves look better than their neighbor. They don't realize that the only sin that will send them to hell is judging other people.
J. Robert Ross
Global warming isn't a science issue, it's a political issue. As a political issue, there are at least two competing viewpoints.
The advocates for global warming, as we all know, are the liberal Democrats. The problem though, is that the Democrats will say anything. We know that President Obama, the lead Democrat, has said we can keep our health plans and that was not true. He said we could keep our doctors and that was not true. He said he did not draw a red line on Syria, but that was not true. He said the attacks in Benghazi were caused by a video, and that was not true.
The lead Democrat, who speaks for all Democrats, has said many things that aren't true. So why should we believe him when he says there's global warming?
Republicans like Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, Andy Barr and others have been working hard to stop Obama and his liberal Democrats from unilaterally imposing rules that hurt Kentucky coal and Kentucky coal miners. Barr was even running against a Democrat who actually voted to help Obama raise taxes on Kentucky coal. We're all glad Andy won, but the liberal Democrats won't give up that easy.
Kentucky needs to remain ever vigilant, standing up for our own. The only new regulations coming out of Washington are rules designed to hurt Kentucky coal. We need to make sure that Washington stays the heck out of our coal fields.
Vets count, too
It was a Christmas miracle. Congressional Democrats and Republicans came together on a budget deal. But, on what issues could this polarized legislature possibly rally behind? Well, for one, to cut cost of living adjustments for current and future military retirees. See, if we'll just work together, we can come up with solutions that are win-win for everyone. Unless you count vets.
In defense of Barr
A recent editorial criticized Congressman Andy Barr's efforts to maintain a close relationship with his constituents.
Just when the partisanship in America has reached a fever pitch, the Herald-Leader editorial board unleashes a partisan attack on a congressman who is doing everything within his power to give his constituents a voice in Washington.
It would be easy for Barr to sit back and do what he pleases — just as his predecessor did. The Herald-Leader criticizes Barr for being on the fringe, yet this paper also criticizes him for simply asking his constituents to provide their opinions on the issues of the day.
Barr is a fresh face in politics, and it is very telling to see the Herald-Leader join Washington liberals in hurling baseless criticisms for doing what this paper often accuses Barr of failing to do -- listening to his constituents.
I am proud that Barr represents me in Washington, because this is the first time in recent memory I have had a congressman who spends more time with the people of Kentucky's Sixth District than he does with Washington elites.
I call on the Herald-Leader to remove the partisan lens from which you view this public servant. Do not criticize Andy Barr for being out of touch while also criticizing him for seeking feedback from constituents.
It would benefit the paper to stop publishing attacks on Republicans that make the paper look unfair.
A recent letter writer suffers from the same malady that he attributes to Senator Mitch McConnell.
Either his memory has badly failed or it reflects the typical liberal attempt to persuade others by resorting to half-truths.
Senator Barack Obama made an impassioned speech on the Senate floor opposing rule changes that would permit the so-called nuclear option. Senator Harry Reid did likewise while not being as eloquent as Obama. Forgot that?
McConnell is assuredly correct that the party who makes that change will rue the day, a simple truth that we will eventually see play out in Washington when the Democrats sit on the minority side of the aisle.
Bill R. Rice
Patel's tragic death
Reading the article about the shooting of Mukeshbhai Patel should make everyone angry and upset. A hard-working father and family man was gunned down in broad daylight, even though he was giving the robber all the cash in his drawer.
Then to read further that the 18-year-old alleged robber has had several brushes with the law since turning 18 in June -- basically a little over five months. In August he broke into a Shell Station and last month was charged with third degree burglary, criminal mischief, receiving stolen property and theft.
On Nov. 27 Judge Ernesto Scorsone released him with an unsecured bond and told him to stay away from gas stations. Why in the world would this judge expect this man to listen and obey?
The man was supposed to show up in court Dec. 2 -- no-show. He was arrested again on Dec. 4 and released again Dec. 7. Then on Dec 9, instead of being in court, he allegedly was robbing a gas station and killing another human being.
Wait a minute -- did he not understand Scorsone, who told him to stay away from gas stations?
Anyone and everyone who was involved in this tragedy should attend Patel's funeral service to see if maybe next time they might remember and do things a little differently to save someone else's life.
Recently, a Kentucky-based Baptist-affiliated foster care agency, specializing in caring for abused and neglected children, voted against hiring gays and lesbians.
This agency receives the majority of their funding through the state. Refusing to hire a person based upon their sexual orientation is discrimination and should not be tolerated. Throughout history, there has been hatred for those who are different based on race or religious affiliation. Of all groups, the Baptists should not discriminate as they were once discriminated against themselves.
Allowing agencies to discriminate against a group perpetuates the viewpoint that some in our society are worthy while others are not. The children in this foster care agency deserve to have caregivers working to ensure their safety and well-being. Sexual orientation does not have anything to do with the competence of the caregiver and should not be a determinant for employment. This policy should be retracted and the agency should focus on its main goal: protecting and caring for the children.
Now is the time for change, which is understood in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013, designed to protect employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation. If this agency is not willing to help the children without pushing their own beliefs on others, they should not receive any state or federal funding. It is time that they align their views with the 21st century and learn to accept all qualified employees in order to provide the best care to these vulnerable children.
TWC service dismal
I must agree with a recent writer's observations about Time Warner Cable service to local subscribers. TWC bookkeeping practices seem to abound with errors and arbitrary pricing policies. A visit to their local office is a dismal experience at best. Online and telephone encounters are baffling. In a word TWC has been a disappointing experience. No doubt the company can be encouraged to do better.
Eric Howard Christianson
Cut military budget
You would think that the whole world is our enemy since our military budget is greater than all of the rest of the world put together. How did we get there?
Philip Zelikow, of the University of Virginia, explains it in part by the way military budgets are put together, from the bottom up. All new systems, wars and strategies are added to the old, thus the budget grows decade after decade. No strategic overhaul from the top down. Thus, military manufacturers in favored states are protected; the jobs at bases and other military entities in nearly all states are protected. Congressmen don't want to defend closures and job losses at home. Wouldn't the strategic rethinking of our defense needs and the consequent budget realignment be more than sufficient to balance the budget over the next 10 years?
The late Chalmers Johnson, in a video entitled "Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic," presents views similar to our Tea Party prophets. His point is that military spending is driving the nation into unsustainable and insoluable debt. Tea Party prophets, of course, would not favor military cutbacks. But they express fear for the life of the republic because of the national debt.
So I ask, is it in our national interest to finance a military establishment equal to that of the rest of the world? I don't think so. But by restoring the military sequestration in the recent budget compromise our paid representatives apparently think so.