By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Your Views: Administration more concerned with terrorists than US citizens
Placeholder Image
Letters policy
Send e-mail to (no attached files, please, which can contain viruses); fax to 770-532-0457; or mail to The Times, P.O. Box 838, Gainesville, GA 30503. Include full name, hometown and phone number for confirmation. They should be limited to one topic on issues of public interest and may be edited for content and length. Letters forwarded from other sources or those involving personal or business disputes, poetry, expressions of faith or memorial tributes may be rejected. You may be limited to one letter per month, two on a single topic. Submitted items may be published in print, electronic or other forms. Letters, columns and cartoons express the opinions of the authors and not of The Times editorial board.

The release of CIA documents, which supposedly validates the allegations of torture by the Bush administration, was the ultimate in foolishness. Our enemies must think, "how stupid can anyone be?"

We are told this will close a chapter of "dark and painful days" in the history of our country. However, what it validates is the mind-boggling hypocrisy of Mr. (Barack) Obama and his party. Why are they so upset about a terrorist being slapped, having a bug in his cell, etc. but have no reservations about a full-term baby having its skull crushed?

From what I have seen, these people who have no reluctance about killing us, given the opportunity, are still alive and being very well cared for at club Gitmo. In contrast, the only thing some 50,000,000 plus have done is having the unfortunate experience of being conceived in a land that protects this hideous practice but not them.

I am afraid, if we continue down the road Mr. Obama intends for us to travel, we will have many more dark and painful days, months and perhaps years. Will God bless a leader who condones the evil of abortion with the wisdom required to lead this nation?

Mr. Obama seems to be more passionate about apologizing for our perceived wickedness as opposed to being our proud champion, more focused on slobbering over Hugo or bowing before a Saudi king than telling the world we are still the land of the free and the brave.

No other nation has given the blood and treasure for the cause of liberty. We need not apologize to anyone! A world without the U.S. would be a world under the heel of a Hitler or a similar tyrant.

Mr. Obama seems to be very confused about his responsibilities. He was elected to defend the Constitution and protect us. He swore to do this. So far he has trashed the Constitution; this is very puzzling because he professes to have taught constitutional law. (Wonder what kind of education his students got?)

His first 100 days don't give me any reassurance in how well he is going to protect us, either. His agenda, apparently, is to remake our land into Obamaland and not what our founders had in mind.

I am a World War II veteran, a "right-wing Christian extremist" and a believer in the right given us in the Second Amendment. According to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, I am now considered a person to be watched. I am not a terrorist, nor do I plan to become one, contrary to what Janet implies. But I feel like I have been slapped in the face and waterboarded by her with the blessing of our present administration.

This seems to be indicative of the twisted mindset of Mr. Obama's administration. It appears he and his cronies are more concerned about "conservative" citizens being a threat to national security, i.e. them, than a "man-created disaster."

I was a "tea party" participant. I suppose I am now on Janet's list. If so, I am honored.

Gary Gambrell

Evolution is more a religion than true Christian faith is
I seldom read anything that Joan King has to say. However, her Tuesday column, "Science, faith at odds, but why?" caught my attention.

She talks about religion and science. I feel it necessary to define these terms: Religion is mankind's attempt to bridge the gap between man and God. The science that she refers to is "junk science," not science at all.

She speaks of the Bible, but fails to understand what it has to say. The Bible tells us God's plan to reconcile mankind to himself. That is vastly different than religion. There are many religions that attempt to bridge the gap between God and man, but only one plan by which God builds the bridge.

I personally hate religion. I have a personal relationship with a Creator God through his one and only son, Jesus Christ who died and rose again to make this relationship possible. It is a matter of relationship, not religion.

The "science" that she refers to is evolution. Science relies on laws, that which can be consistently reproduced without fail. Evolution cannot be reproduced. It is only a theory. A theory that is, actually, an anti-religion.

Evolution requires much more faith to believe than it takes to believe in a Creator God. To be possible, evolution requires the repeal of the laws of science.

For example, the second Law of Thermodynamics describes basic principles familiar in everyday life. It is partially a universal law of decay; the ultimate cause of why everything ultimately falls apart and disintegrates over time. Material things are not eternal. Everything appears to change eventually and chaos increases. Nothing stays as fresh as the day one buys it; clothing becomes faded, threadbare and ultimately returns to dust. Everything ages and wears out. Even death is a manifestation of this law.

The effects of the second law are all around, touching everything in the universe. Everything moves from order to disorder; everything is dying. So this law would have had to have been reversed for evolution to even be possible.

What about DNA? What are the chances that DNA wrote itself? Everyone and everything has it's own special DNA. The amount of information contained in DNA is mind-boggling.

Evolution is nothing more than man's attempt to explain away God. It cannot be proven but is presented as if it were fact, as if it were a law of science. It is taught in our schools and presented as fact.

As stated, it is an anti-religion, a secular religion and as such should not be allowed to be taught in schools unless it is presented as a religion and creation is also taught.

Jerry Callahan