The letter "Political activism gets churches into hot water" in the Sunday Herald-Mail (Nov. 26) is a flawed article with flawed reasoning.
My last letter refuting G. F. Miller, who doesn't believe sinners will burn in hell was not deemed worthy of printing. The bottom line was that just because Mr. Miller does not know the Bible well enough to determine authentic Christianity makes him an authority beyond challenge is ludicrous. It really does not take a great deal of intelligence or knowledge to seek and find that hellfire and torment is forever.
I do not know where Miller's authentic Christianity comes from, as he seems to keep it a big secret. Belief in God (the father), Jesus (the son), and the Holy Spirit is the foundation and the rock, and, being born and filled of the Holy Spirit equals ordination into authentic Christianity.
The Bible teaches all men (humans) are flawed and come short of the glory of God. This would seem to mean that the human race is flawed, period. When you take emulation from the pulpit, or anywhere else for that matter, and associate that with the Word of God (Bible) reveals which of the Seven Churches of Asia represent authentic Christianity.
The primary reason Mr. Miller's letter is flawed stems from his perceived understanding of what may or may not be obvious when being elected to a position of authority. It is obvious, however, for whatever reason stepping down from his position of authority was the required ideal.
Listening to liberals makes rational people understand the need for a higher authority than man to base his life on.
Phillip M. Snider
Patriots question their leaders
To the editor:
This letter is in response to Lee Stack's letter on Nov. 2, "Angry messages don't merit space." He accused me of "bashing" Bush, being "anger-filled" and having "disrespect" for Bush. He also accused The Herald-Mail of featuring my letters "quite often," and always printing "every word happily."
First of all, yes, I am angry, but Stack is spinning the word "angry" to make it appear I hate America and all she stands for. I love my country. That is the very reason I speak out against what I believe to be dangers to our way of life.
I am angry with Bush for abolishing habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution when he signed the Military Commissions Act. I am angry about Iraq and the abundant corruption within the Republican Party.
It is our duty as Americans to dissent when we are unhappy with our leaders. That is what democracy and America is all about.
The government was not established to rule over us as it is currently doing. Our Constitution did not come from a king or an emperor, but from "we the people." Every American should be angry if anything ever threatens this precious document.
Someone has - President Bush. And not many care. You better believe I'm angry about that. It seems most of America agreed with me on Nov. 7, and that gives me hope.
Simply stating facts about the president should never be confused with "disrespecting" him. Do I think he's the worst president ever? Of course I do. But that is not disrespectful to say.
Theodore Roosevelt said, "That we are 'to stand by the president, right or wrong,' is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." Was he anger-filled too, Mr. Stack?
Now, let's clear up some untruths. The Herald Mail is not a fan of mine and does not print all my letters, nor every word when they do. They did not print a letter I sent in July about the history of the Bush family. Whether the reason was biased or they thought it wasn't factual, it wasn't printed. So, please, Mr. Stack, don't assume, research before you accuse. Another thing....they print many, many long letters, not just mine. Ask Allan Powell.
I also noticed, Mr. Stack that you didn't refute anything in my letter. Your letter's message was: "I am angry at what you said you should be silenced." That's in our Constitution. It's what makes America great, that we can express different opinions. You want that banned?