To The Daily: I am so disheartened by the climate pervading our news writers and commentators when confronted with a difference of opinion. When this difference is reported and hyped, many people are affected and immediately take sides. This contentious tone seems to be becoming the rule so much of the time.
These comments are in response to the July 26 column by Dana Milbank concerning comments made in an interview with the Biblical Recorder by Dan Cathy, president of Chick-fil-A. When asked a question during an interview, Mr. Cathy expressed his views on gay marriage, and then further stated that he supported traditional marriage and family. He did not buy time on TV, take out a newspaper ad, suggest customers fill out a questionnaire in order to be served, or otherwise press his views on anyone. He answered the interviewer’s question.
But here is what Milbank said: “This implied that gay people and divorced people had no business eating at Chick-fil-A.” And the battle begins.
Where is our reasonableness to address such differences with an agree to disagree attitude? There is no good reason to attack those who think differently. Can’t we discuss or choose not to discuss issues that are volatile with respect for each other and without attributing meaning that is not clearly stated by the speaker? Yes, this writer’s piece was on the Opinion page; but he threw it out there as fact and stirred the contentious pot.
Not registered? Click here
|High School Sports||@DecaturPreps|