(Re: “Cain’s manager inhales,” Danish Plan, Nov. 3.) When Paul Danish refers to Herman Cain’s future search for “all sorts of unexpected and ignored constituencies” that, like the Smoker’s Block he’s presumably won over, will Cain be going after the Union of Concerned Alcoholics? The Serial Groper Community? The Cannibals Bund? Or even the extremely closeted Eaters of Belly Button Lint (and you know who you are!)?
Who will stand up for the willfully ignorant? It will certainly not be the egg-headed do-gooder liberal elite.
J. Adams/via Internet
Religion and abortion
(Re: “God’s gifts,” letters, Nov. 3.) All I could think after reading J.D. Simonson’s letter on “God’s Gifts” (the supposed gift of life granted by his god who he didn’t identify) was OMG! There is no sense in even discussing Mr. Simonson’s faith-based belief in a creator versus evolution. Faith is defined as “unquestioning belief that does not require proof ” and is therefore immune to logical or reasoned arguments. However, the idea that life for most is a “gorgeous existence we are privileged to live in” is ludicrous on its face, except for maybe the very few of us (1 percent or so?) born into luxury, as is accepting that life, in fact, is just watching the “wonderful changing seasons, the beautiful colors, our mountains, seas, sun...” without putting in “any effort” or paying “a dime” for the privilege.
Even creationist evangelicals would have to blind themselves to any outside news to believe that the majority of people — think Asia, Africa, India, South America, Mexico and a goodly portion of America — actually enjoy a “gorgeous existence.” How could they not be aware of children starving and
sick, being savaged by marauding fighters, being sold into slavery, being sexually abused by their religious leaders or being abused by their own family? You don’t even have to leave Boulder, or Lafayette, in Mr. Simonson’s case, to find people abusing children, in some cases confining them in horrid conditions, contributing to their deaths.
As far as having some benevolent god, whichever one the faithful may choose to believe in — and there are plenty of choices — being the creator, I would argue his or her motives should be examined more carefully by those believers. I would ask why their benevolent god would also provide this partial list of “gifts” to his beloved children: autism, arthritis, Down syndrome, mental retardation, physical deformities, cancer, heart disease etc., etc., etc. While I’m at it I might ask why most of the “right to life,” anti-abortion crowd are so anxious to put people to death through state-sponsored executions, wars and denial of universal health care?
I continue to believe abortion is a difficult decision the prospective mother must make, and I would suggest that these folks so worried about “life” put some of their energy into improving it for the 99 percent or so whose “gorgeous existence” requires both effort and dimes and may still not be achieved.
James C. Bailey Jr./Boulder
In response to J.D. Simonson’s letter titled “God’s gifts” as a counterpoint to my “Fetal faith” letter (Oct. 27) regarding the Sacred Heart of Mary Catholic Church using “white crosses” for their (since removed) pro-life display on South Boulder Road to symbolize unborn fetuses, it would seem your letter has missed the mark here.
You state much of the obvious in that “each of us are privileged beings here on Earth reaping all the gifts from our Creator.” Unfortunately, J.D., had you read my letter closely you would see that it wasn’t directed as a jab against “the Creator,” but more so at “pro- Catholic/pro-life views,” as Sacred Heart took it upon themselves to use the sign of the crucifixion of “their chosen God” to symbolize the religion of an unborn fetus. I will agree with you in that the majority of humans here on Earth believe in some form of “a creator,” but for those who are still unborn perhaps the Sacred Heart of Mary Catholic Church shouldn’t jump in so quickly and push the sign of the cross as a symbol of an unborn fetus. For a fetus has no brain function in the womb and therefore cannot choose whether it believes in their God, a God or any God, for that matter.
Keep moving your money
Voters in Boulder are clearly fed up with corporate control of our lives. In the Nov. 1 election, 73 percent of us supported 2H, a measure in favor of a constitutional amendment to abolish Constitutional rights for corporations and end the Supreme Court’s equating money with speech.
Support across the country for the Occupy movement is another indication that people want real change that puts control of our government and economy into our hands. In a recent CBS/ New York Times survey (Oct. 26), 43 percent of people said they agree with Occupy Wall Street’s goals, while 27 percent said they disagree. Thirty percent were unsure.
Last weekend, we had the opportunity to say “NO” to Wall Street banks and corporate power by participating in “Bank Transfer Day.” Thousands of people across the world moved their money from big commercial banks to small, locally owned credit unions. Our clear, unified message to Wall Street: end your reckless speculation, which is destroying our economy and jobs; make loans to homeowners and small businesses; and stop buying our government. By moving our money, we’ll be supporting local banks and credit unions that are locally controlled and make local loans to homeowners and small businesses.
Occupy Wall Street and the General Assembly of Occupy Boulder are backing this movement. Please join this growing, ongoing effort. For more information, go to www.occupyboulder.org.
Boulder Weekly welcomes your e-mail correspondence. Letters must not exceed 400 words and should include your name, address and telephone number for verification. Addresses will not be published. We do not publish anonymous letters or those signed with pseudonyms. Letters become the property of Boulder Weekly and will be published on our website. Send letters to: firstname.lastname@example.org. Look for Boulder Weekly on the World Wide Web at: www.boulderweekly. com.