Pitts headline draws ire
The heading for the comments Leonard Pitts made concerning further laws covering gun registration which was directed toward "gun nuts" is a good example why there is a growing divide between certain groups of people in this country. Many people do not want further gun laws passed feeling that the 20K or more that are already in place should be sufficient if they were enforced correctly. Also, believe it or not, a very large percentage of this country is tired of the federal government trying to take more and more control of our lives. To call people that believe in the Second Amendment "gun nuts" is completely wrong. I suppose by using your line of thinking that a comment about "liberal communists" will be OK to describe all liberals and Democrats. Please rethink your comments before you put them in writing. I hope you really didn't mean that all pro-gun people were "gun nuts," but your comments seem to do so.
WILLIAM NEELEY
Look to God for freedom
Homosexuality is not a scriptural term. Men's terms remove the moral and spiritual connotations of a sin and treat it as something outside of God's realm or control. The Bible uses at least 15 different terms to identify, describe and condemn the sin of "sodomy." It is not true that we are born with a certain sexual orientation, but it is true that every person is born with a sin nature and that this sin nature is capable of every kind of lust and vile affection. However, people must first reject the moral laws of God which are written in their heart and then become involved in sensuality. Then God "gives them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves." Romans 1:24. The sin of sodomy is the final stage of moral decay in a society. By its very nature it cannot be contained or controlled once it is given public acceptance. Only the power of God's truth and the grace of God can bring freedom.
GENENDAL FRATANTUONO
Watch out for GOP hypocrisy
Blast from the past. All quotes from these Republican senators are from 2005: "Any president's judicial nominees -- deserve a simple up-or-down vote." -- Mitch McConnell. "We can't find anywhere in the Constitution that says a super majority is needed for confirmation." -- Chuck Grassley. "The Constitution requires the senate to hold up-or-down votes on all nominees."-- Mike Crapo. "Why not allow the president to do his job of selecting judicial nominees." -- Richard Shelby. "I think filibustering judges will destroy the judiciary over time." -- Lindsey Graham. "I believe filibustering judicial nominees is in violation of the Constitution." -- Saxby Chambliss. "Filibustering judicial nominees is unfair, dangerous, partisan and unconstitutional." -- Orrin Hatch. The problem with not knowing history is you have to make it up. The right-wing noise machine with all their fake "scandals" is trying their best to rewrite history, including the annulment of the last two elections. The very essence of a democracy is that "majority rules" -- 50 percent +1. The GOP has made that concept a cruel joke.
ANN BENTON, Signal Mountain