Letters to the Editor for May 22, 2009

Students: Stand up to the critics

To the editor:

The late American tennis player Arthur Ashe died of AIDS, contracted from a contaminated blood transfusion. He stated in his autobiography that the greatest trial of his life was not that he was dying because of someone’s incompetence, but rather that he had been born black in America.

This may seem an odd thing to point out in Baker County, Oregon, except for the conversation on tolerance currently under way. You young folks who are directly involved sure know how to stir things up. I’m proud of you for demonstrating such courage and character. 

Please do not be deceived, even though you have gained some support for your position by your bravery. The qualities of fear, ignorance, and intolerance are available here in abundance, and will not disappear anytime soon. Diversity is NOT prized by these folks. 

My case in point is the appearance of the Boyds’ two letters. Ruthie very plainly states her case that nothing will change her mind. I can only assume this is an example of what Jay refers to as “critical thinking skills.” These two people have set themselves up as an elite group, at least in their own minds. They are convinced that they are very rarely wrong, and they are never, ever, in doubt. Their theory seems to be that if you close your mind you will never again have to be troubled by a new idea. 

As you youngsters have undoubtedly learned, those in this group will attack you whenever and however they can, whether by gossip or outright lies or judging you without listening to any facts at all. Let me remind you that society tends to honor living conformists and dead troublemakers.

Anyone who has ever made the world a better place has had to listen to the critics. The names of Socrates, Thoreau, Martin Luther King, and Lincoln come to mind immediately. I wish you success in your uphill battle to promote tolerance.      

Dave Rama

Baker City

Who judges which path is ‘right?’

To the editor:

Who are we to judge the “right” path? In response to Jay and Ruthie Boyd: How dare you. You call yourselves loving Christians who uphold the Catholic faith, but one thing you preach, yet fail to practice, is that of love and tolerance of others.

Mrs. Boyd clearly stated that “only God can judge what is in our hearts and minds.” But who are we, and who are you, Mrs. Boyd, to judge others without first judging ourselves? God told us he who has not sinned to cast the first stone. Are you not a sinner, Mrs. Boyd? Are you casting the first stone? God did not give us the “responsibility to judge behaviors,” especially the behaviors of homosexuals. I do agree with on thing: “hate the sin, love the sinner.” And that is a responsibility God did give us. However, in “hating the sin,” we are not to condemn the sinner, nor their choices, but simply love them as God so dearly loves us — all of us.

Ruthie stated that “it’s up to the rest of you to help steer these kids back on the right path.” My question to Ruthie is who are you to say they’re on the “wrong” path? I am a Catholic and hold strong to my faith and beliefs, but I do stand up for homosexuals and anyone’s choice of sexual orientation. God created us equally and in turn, loves all of us equally — and that includes homosexuals. They are seen through God’s loving eyes as His creation. They should not be seen or judged through your condemning eyes, Jay and Ruthie.    

Jamey Hardy

Baker City

One-sided tolerance?

To the editor:

I believe every American, meaning all, has the right to state his/her own opinions, beliefs, and religion. I don’t know of anyone who would disagree with me thus far, since it is in our First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech...”

Yet this freedom of ours is being tested today in our very own city. Does Ms. Opperman and others like her no longer have the right to speak their opinions and beliefs? Those who promote tolerance of homosexuality are being “intolerant” of those whose religious convictions say homosexuality is wrong. If you have the right to disagree with Ms. Opperman, then Ms. Opperman should also have the right to disagree with you. Otherwise, your tolerance is one-sided. One-sided tolerance in reality is no tolerance at all. Tolerance means the act of willingly enduring another’s opinions even when one disagrees. If it is true that Ms. Opperman does not have the right to stand up and proclaim/share her beliefs with others because she is being considered “intolerant,” then I also have no right to say that I am a Christian, since doing so would mean I believe in the Bible, and the Bible states that homosexuality is wrong. Do I therefore no longer have the freedom to speak about my Christian beliefs without being labeled “intolerant?”

As a Christian, I believe everyone, including homosexuals, should be treated with respect. The Bible says that all men are created equal. Just because I, or anyone else, may disagree with someone for being homosexual, it does not make me intolerant of that person. The same book that tells me homosexuality is wrong, also states that I’m to love everyone. I will not love a person any less for being homosexual, but I also will not agree that what they are doing is right. Just as I should not be able to force someone to be straight, neither should someone be able to force me to deny my belief in the Bible’s truth that homosexuality is wrong.    

Kori Rayborn

Baker City