IN HER RECENT column, Christine Flowers writes, "I reject the premise that language, even harsh language, can trigger havoc. Words don't kill. Sick, evil people do." Therefore, she claims, the inflammatory language of the anti-abortion movement has nothing to do with the violent attacks against abortion providers. Ms. Flowers also indicates that she is an "unapologetic Christian." She should remember, then, the flyers that were circulated in El Salvador in the '70s and '80s instructing soldiers to "Be a patriot! Kill a priest!" and the venomous language used by the Salvadoran media against Archbishop Oscar Romero and other religious leaders. Can she honestly say that the people who made these statements had no responsibility for the murder of Romero, the six priests at the Jesuit university and the four Maryknoll churchwomen who were raped and killed 35 years ago this month, and the many others?
Lawrence M. Ladutke
Author of Freedom of Expression in El Salvador
Kudos to Christine Flowers for courageously drawing a clear distinction between those who defend the life of the unborn through lawful speech and criminally insane individuals who think that shooting up a women's health clinic is the only way to save lives.
And for those who claim that pro-life advocates like Ms. Flowers care only about the life of the baby before birth, she lists her many personal contributions to child welfare. The irrational mistake that too many make is to lump murderous extremists with sincerely motivated activists using constitutionally protected speech to champion the unborn child.
Gloria C. Endres
For those readers who feel like the "Black Lives Matter" movement is irrelevant, I say it's really long overdue.
White people have been acting like only white lives matter since they first set foot on this continent. How many treaties (made with the only true Native Americans) were broken in the name of exploration, settlement and pure greed?
No white person has ever been owed, and failed to collect, 20 acres and a mule for the back-breaking work performed to build the foundation that is the country we all know and enjoy today.
White men are not being shot down in the streets of this country in the same manner and at the same rate as young black men are being killed.
As they did with Affirmative Action by declaring reverse racism and declaring the existence of quotas, white people who have a problem with a level playing field cannot now co-opt the "Black Lives Matter" movement. The reasons for its inception apply only to this group of people.
In the aftermath of the recent San Bernardino massacre where 14 unsuspecting people were shot to death, investigators are reportedly probing the incident as "possible" terrorism. Seriously? Are they suggesting that an incident of this magnitude could have been something other than terrorism?
If the slaughter of 14 innocent people isn't an act of terrorism, what else do authorities suggest it may have been?