No timeout for Rudy
Re. three letters about my letters published in the VND: Of the dozen or so regular writers to your paper, to be singled out by Tony Parker (“Time-out for Rudy,” Jan. 18) is an honor. He claims to speak for many readers who he says are tired of my opinions.
I am grateful for the support of the other two letter writers, who still value freedom of speech.
I am not a fictional character and have been a Pennsylvania resident for decades. I remember the America in which I grew up. I compare it to today and I'm disappointed. Who can argue when Russian President Vladimir Putin says America has moved away from Christian values?
Our Founding Fathers would be disgusted if they saw U.S. Supreme Court rulings. In a country founded upon Judeo-Christian principles, decisions regarding abortion, traditional marriage and freedom of religion should be no-brainers.
What Mr. Parker calls self-righteous and intolerant, others see as common sense. God made the rules — should we not abide by them?
As a veteran, I detest war and feel it should be our last resort. Many politicians never served in the military, but if they had, they might think twice before sending our sons to war and putting women in combat.
The Constitution that gives me the right to write letters also gives Parker the right to ignore them. It would sadden me if someone had a heart attack because he read one of my letters. Isn't one's health more important than opinions?
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.