reporter contents :: albright college


Along North 13th Street

The Albright Reporter encourages letters to the editor related to issues discussed in the magazine, issues that relate to college news or policies, or that are of interest to a segment of our readership. Letters can be mailed, faxed or sent via e-mail.

For our Letters to the Editor Policy, please click here.

The Albright Reporter
Albright College
13th & Bern Streets
Reading, PA 19612-5234
Fax: 610-921-7295

Dear Albright Reporter,

I have just read in The Albright Reporter about the passing of Dr. Charlie Raith and was deeply saddened.

I had Prof. Raith for several classes in my senior year at Albright. It was obvious he loved the Constitution and what it stands for. Thus, it was always a thrilling experience to sit in his classes and learn new and different reasons about why America was so great. For that I will always be grateful and will never feel guilty for being American. But, I reserve my sincerest thanks to Prof. Raith for his ability to help me set my moral compass. It has guided me well over the years.

He was a good man and an excellent teacher. He will be missed.

Harry H. Houck
Albuquerque, N.M.
Class of 1965

Dear Albright Reporter,

David A. Mink’s naive implication that the U.S. failed to make every effort to win in Vietnam echos a common myth that conflicts with the historical record. Mink also promotes the immoral notion that the September 11 attacks give our country license to kill whomever we want without provocation.

Mink has the right to express an opinion, but The Albright Reporter should be careful not to associate the College with such violent, unsophisticated views.

Jack Moriarty
Reading, Pa.


Dear Albright Reporter,

Like David Mink ’68, I attended Albright College in the late 60s — class of ’67. I did not graduate but finished my degree later at Pitt. I was so disheartened to read his article about his new political awareness since then. His assumptions seem to fly in the face of reality and the facts — an apparent inconsequential problem with this Bush administration.

The continual blurring of distinctions between Bin Laden and Saddam and equating them leads to disastrous results. Granted 9/11 was horrific. But Saddam had no connection with that event. Plans had been drawn up as early as 1998 to have this invasion of Iraq by the team of Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz and Richard Perle. September 11 merely gave them the opportunity to play out their devious little plot.

Unfortunately, just as in Vietnam, the peons have become their pawns and the justifications for this war are all over the place. Have we liberated Iraq? Have we seen the dancing in the streets? Are we safer? Will this war do anything but keep oil prices up and ensure a victory for the Bush regime? Would Mr. Mink want an employee who made such reckless predictions and implemented them with such disastrous outcomes? No, because the employee would be fired and Mr. Mink would be bankrupt. Just like this country will be if they continue with their plans.

I think Mr. Mink forgot just what Vietnam was. A war based on lies, perpetuated by lies and now the history of it is being revised with lies. We used millions of men and billions upon billions of dollars and still the outcome was unable to be changed. Just as Mr. Mink could say there are not enough dollars and time to eradicate poverty and ignorance in the world, so too must one realize that fighting an unjust war in a foreign land with the people against you will never give us a favorable outcome.

Maybe young David Mink back in 1968 knew more about the world than he does now. Back then he had the time, inquisitiveness, and the opportunity to investigate and know what was going on. “Just give peace a chance” has more relevance today than back then. We are giving war the chance and it will destroy us all.

Mr. Mink said in his article that war should not be waged without a full commitment from its people. He forgot to add that war should not be waged under false pretenses. When war was started in March of this year, well over 50 percent of the people were opposed to it. After it began, people felt obligated to support the troops, and in turn, the war. And now many of the troops themselves and their families have second thoughts.

What study has Mr. Mink done to feel qualified to give his stamp of approval on this mess?

Alice Varner Bentley
Portage, Pa.
Class of 1967


Dear Albright Reporter,

My wife graduated from Albright. She receives The Albright Reporter, and happened to see the “Mailbag” section in the Summer 2003 issue, which she brought to my attention. As a licensed Southern Baptist minister, I would like to offer some responses to what I read.

Mr. James Ridgway wrote of the horrors of (religious) “fanaticism.” I would remind him that the founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ, was “marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion” — aka, a “fanatic.” He also spoke of “Freedom of choice, freedom of religion, freedom of speech.” We enjoy those freedoms in this great country of ours because — and only because — our nation was founded on distinctly biblical notions of right and wrong, good and bad. And, for the record, I served four years active duty in the United States Marine Corps.

To Ms. Harriet Shapiro I would simply offer a word of caution regarding the hyper-tolerance that she seems to endorse. While we certainly should be accepting of all people, we are not to uncritically endorse destructive lifestyles.

Ms. Tricha Shivas had quite a bit to say about “hate.” While I may not agree entirely with Mr. August’s viewpoint (or his exegesis), he certainly has every right to it (just as Ms. Shivas has every right to hers) and I, for one, appreciate The Albright Reporter’s including it within its pages. While, sadly, “God and the Bible” certainly have been used by some to do harm to entire groups of people, Christianity as a whole has done more to further human rights for all peoples than any other religion.

I would remind Mr. Robert Nagle that, contrary to his assertions, subscribing to the inerrancy of the Bible does not automatically equate to an endorsement of “slavery, the shunning of lepers as unclean, and the stoning of sinners.” Jesus risked public ridicule and rejection by counting women among his followers. Mother Teresa, among others, gave her life helping lepers. And while all of us as sinners do indeed deserve to be stoned, God instead offers us grace and mercy provided we accept the sacrifice his Son made on our behalf.

Ms. Michelle Alt voiced her concern over “hate” and “violence,” and claims that “Our differences and the acknowledgement of those differences is the strength that built this country.” Actually, it’s more accurate to say that the strength that built this country was our shared conviction that Almighty God is alive and real and has made his will clearly known in his Word, the Bible.

I remain profoundly thankful that I live in a country that guarantees me the right to express my views and that I serve a God who both expects and empowers me to do so.

Greg Williamson
Raleigh, N.C.


reporter contents :: albright college