I am a Christian. I have a hard time viewing last week's events as judgments from God because that seems like double jeopardy. Being a Christian means I believe Jesus Christ paid for my sins on the cross—and not only mine, but also those of the hijackers. If anything, God is simply letting us reap what we have sown. You see, I believe that God not only loves me but also actually cares how I live and treat people. He cares so much He had the Bible written to teach me His standards. My God is also just. Disobedience and sin must be punished. That's where Jesus, the cross and His resurrection come in. It's all paid for, but I must receive the gift through repenting (very hard to do) my failure to live up to His standards. People do not like to be told how to live. I sure don't.
I do not understand the mechanics of the born-again experience. I just pray that it happens to the hijackers, you and everyone on this beautiful planet.
Reading Christian radio talk-show host Rich Agozino's hateful words in the aftermath of Tuesday's terrorist attacks, I experienced a chilling sense of déjà vu. Agozino was expressing the same sentiments as suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. God save us all from the kind of God that Agozino and bin Laden both seem to believe in.
The incredible terrorist devastation in New York and Washington, D.C., Sept. 11 reveals how vulnerable we are to the use of commercial aircraft as weapons of mass destruction. Knowing that more than 90 percent of all incoming flights at the proposed commercial-cargo airport at El Toro will come in low directly over our rooftops, Leisure World/Laguna Woods is haunted by the memory of a collision of two Marine Corps jets that crashed into 272 Avenida Sevilla and 281 Avenida Carmel on Jan. 22, 1967, killing four residents and a pilot. The horrifying accident occurred only 750 feet east of the designated flight corridor. For a more detailed account, go to the El Toro website, www.eltoroairport.org. Click on "Table of Contents," then scroll down to "Safety and Flight Paths."
While running an article deploring the Shack's white supremacy shows (Rich Kane's "Springboard for Hitler," Sept. 7), you still ran the club's ad. The ad is in the Sept. 14 paper as well. I wonder how you can decry the Shack's policy of booking shows based solely on the amount of money they will bring in—no matter the content—when carrying the Shack's ad amounts to the same thing. Is this a sign of the Weekly's new comfort with embracing hypocrisy?
The guy who pulled the short straw responds:Sure, you could look at it that way. Or you could look at it this way—the reason theWeekly is able to run the stories it does is because our advertising department has no say in what we write. Not a damn word. That's a remarkable—and very rare—freedom. Its price? We can't tell them what the hell to do either. You may look at that as hypocritical. We choose to be grateful for the freedom we have here. I haven't experienced it anywhere else. Also note that Rich Kane didn't "decry" or "deplore" the Shack's policy but merely disclosed it.