By Gustavo Arellano
By R. Scott Moxley
By Alfonso Delgado
By Courtney Hamilton
By Joel Beers
By Peter Maguire
By Charles Lam
By Charles Lam
Letters may be edited for clarity and length. E-mail to email@example.com, or send to Letters to the Editor, c/o OC Weekly, 1666 N. Main St., Ste. 500, Santa Ana, CA 92701. Or fax to (714) 550-5908.
Editor's note: Gustavo Arellano received more than 100 e-mails regarding his coverage of the Catholic sex-abuse scandal, many praising him for his "inherently moral and compassionate" character. Here are the other four:
Yes, there are some corrupt individuals within the Church, but does that mean the entire Church itself is corrupt? One thing I've always wondered: Is the percentage of child molesters within the Church higher, lower or the same as the percentage of child molesters in any other large organization? Probably the same, but because accepting spiritual guidance from something other than drugs, alcohol, etc. is not fashionable these days, the Church is a great target.
The editor responds: Interesting point, Tricia, but allow me to offer another reason why the Church is a "great target." It's because the Church protected priests who raped innocent children. Again, and I want to be clear on this so I'm going to go slow: theCHURCH protectedPRIESTS whoRAPED innocentCHILDREN. Whatcha think?
I think a good number of these individuals are in this for the money. I keep wondering "Where were the parents?" Fortunately for me, none of the parishes I have belonged to in my 67 years has been accused of having a pedophile priest. God is a just God, so I suggest you leave God to be the judge, lest you be judged also.
I have a degree in journalism. I found little real journalism in your story. Try harder.
I'm a regular reader of the Weekly and have followed your series of stories on the Orange Diocese with interest. Your latest ["The Year in Keeping the Faith," Dec. 31] continues to fascinate me, not for the revelation you are Catholic, but that you are a practicing Catholic. I understand having a cultural affinity for an ethnicity or religion, but I truly don't understand how a thoughtful person could actively practice any religion. I'm not trying to be personally insulting here, I really am . . . just curious.
Gustavo Arellano responds: Jon, it's intellectual bullies like you who give lefties a bad name and turned the Midwest states red. As for you, Ron, I have a JOB in journalism. I found little real criticism in your criticism. Try stopping.
Steve Lowery supports without question Arte Moreno's proposal to change the Angels' city affiliation from Anaheim to Los Angeles—or even worse, the intellectually insulting compromise, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim ["The Year in Letting Go, Go Angels," Dec. 31]. Moreno wants to change the name because he hopes a local TV station might pay more for broadcast rights. But KCAL just dumped the Angels for a long-term deal with the Dodgers starting in 2006, so it would appear the only other option is KCOP, which will offer a lowball bid, knowing the Angels have no other choice. Even if KCOP felt generous and gave the Angels the same deal the Dodgers had, it would only be another $3 million per year, which these days is the equivalent of a veteran utility player. If this is all about a "higher profile," as Lowery wrote, then let me be the first to propose that OC Weekly infringe upon its sister publication's name and change its masthead to "LA Weekly of Orange County."
Stephen C. Smith
I found the review of Lou Reed's performance in Long Beach amusing enough the first time you ran it, but less so when you reprinted it in your year-end issue ["Diary of a Loud County," Dec. 31]. If your writer, Chris Ziegler, doesn't like the five-string bass, that's his prerogative. It's just, you know, Fernando Saunders has been Reed's bassist for most of the past 22 years at this point. The outrage of it all should have been blunted by this time.
Greg Stacy's paean to sadistically murderous fantasy represents the holiday season well: when everything is for sale, nothing matters ["Pop! Culture," Dec. 24]. He universalizes his tribute to the nihilism of our rootless culture with a Nietzschean swagger. Yet one must ask who this "we" is that he refers to finally. Since he's protected by the First Amendment, I would be the last to deny his right to preach any damn-fool idiocy that strikes his fancy. But please do not include me with those who welcome the extension of cultural uglification. Commercial success has not yet achieved the status of an absolute good. Admittedly, it comes close for many. Our true destiny lies elsewhere.
COOLEST NAME EVER
I'm just curious if your other readers ever celebrate on the toilet when they actually understand a paragraph in your paper. How about you start color coding the sentences? Like blue is for facts and red is for the author's voices in his head—you could do hot pink and maroon if the author has more than one voice inside. And please make sure the colors contrast heavily when the voices start arguing on paper. That's where I usually get lost and start looking for hookers.