Letters: Our Marxist leaders looking to hush anti-liberal speech

Our Marxist leaders looking to hush anti-liberal speech
The Opelika-Auburn News had an AP article recently regarding U. S. Attorney General Holder’s call for a new hate crimes law. The article appeared throughout the country and was intended to win public support for the bill.

Holder is quoted as saying, “We will not tolerate murder, or other threats of violence, masquerading as political activism.” Yet, murder, threats of violence and other heinous crimes are already prosecuted under the laws of every state, regardless of political motives or the objects of such assaults. However, one gay and lesbian Web site notes that this legislation will provide “… both enhanced penalties and federal involvement…” for hate crimes.

The title of the bill sounds good, but its primary, though not exclusive, goal is to silence dissent against alternative lifestyles. For instance, if the bill passes and a parent complains about a teacher’s promoting homosexuality to her elementary school children, she will be committing a hate crime. If a minister preaches on the Biblical view of this topic, he could find himself in court. And state laws against same-sex marriage will become invalid. (If Obama succeeds in his efforts to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, it will simply be frosting on the cake.) One should check various Web sites to see how hate crimes legislation is already playing out in Canada and Europe. It’s frightening.

In addition, our Marxist leaders are pushing yet another way to silence opposition of all views contrary to the ultra-liberal left through the so-called Fairness Doctrine. The goal in this case is to use the FCC to silence all conservative radio hosts such as Dr. James Dobson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and about 900 others.

It appears that freedom of speech is headed down the tube, and thought control is on the way. Who would have ever imagined it?

Vic Payne
Auburn

Did soldier enlist in Army just to play tiddlywinks?

Monday, the Opelika-Auburn News published (front page) an article from an individual proudly proclaiming defense of himself for refusing redeployment to Iraq last year while serving in the U.S. Army. I can’t tell from the article if he received an honorable discharge, a general discharge or a general discharge under honorable conditions. He stated that he had not even lost his G.I. Bill and that he still received service related benefits, including funds to attend college.

I noticed that he stated that the Army had taught him how to punch someone in a way that would kill this person and how to stab someone to do the same. Did he sign up for the U.S. Army to play tiddlywinks?

In my opinion, he should have been declared AWOL, arrested, court-martialed and given a dishonorable discharge. In no way should he receive the type of service-related benefits being awarded to our nation’s sons and daughters that are proudly serving their country.

In my opinion, he is no soldier and that is why I referred to him as an individual. I refuse to attach the label of soldier to someone like him. The title of soldier represents a title of great honor and should be reserved for people that act like a soldier.

Buddy Young
Auburn

U.S. should adopt universal health care that rivals others

Health care is bankrupting many in our country. Can’t the U.S. adopt a universal health care system that will rival other developed countries? Out of 29 developed countries, all have universal care which costs around half of what U.S. care costs and their outcomes are better than ours including infant mortality and life expectancy.

In the U.S., 45 million people do not have health insurance and many who have insurance are not covered adequately. We should recognize that many of the uninsured receive uncompensated care that adds to the costs of those insured. Many of the uninsured are young adults who tend to have few medical costs. So covering this uninsured group has now been estimated to add only a few percentage points to our overall national health bill.

Americans, I believe, would be shocked to learn that 33 percent of our health care costs do not go for patient care. The insurance and pharmaceutical industries drain that much into their operational costs, advertising, executive compensation and profits to shareholders. In contrast Medicare administrative costs are around 3 percent. Health care is a big moneymaker for insurance and pharmaceutical companies so we can expect them to use every scare tactic in the book to try to defeat any program that would lower their profits. Health care costs must be reigned in somehow. In 1965 we spent 6 percent of our gross national product (GNP) on education and 6 percent on health care. In 2002 we still spent 6 percent on education but we spent 14 percent on health care.

I urge you to contact your representative and senators to urge them to pass a plan that will make good basic affordable health care available to all of us.

Marilyn Garrett
Opelika