I’ve been thinking about the June 21 letter “Peaceful profession,” in which the writer said it seemed as if liberals have no morals. I’ve heard liberals say the same about conservatives. I know that neither is really true, but we have a hard time understanding each other’s take.
Why is that? Is it just because we don’t listen?
Morality essentially involves how you treat other people. Lord knows liberals have plenty of causes, which alone should suggest that they have morals. A straight white liberal male will stand up for the rights of minorities, women and gay people, who are often discriminated against, even though he has nothing personal to gain from it. When liberals support abortion rights, it’s not because they hate babies, but because they’re concerned about the lifelong impact of unwanted pregnancies on unprepared mothers.
Who do conservatives stand up for?
To be fair, conservatives stand up for our armed forces and veterans. I appreciate that.
But most of their moral concerns seem to be about maintaining their advantages rather than helping other people achieve equality. They seem to be motivated by fear more than courage, generosity, kindness or any other quality we might call “moral.”
Why is it, when we hear of some atrocity like what’s happening at the southern border, it’s always liberals who are leading the charge? Why aren’t conservatives taking the initiative to help those suffering children?
I would love for liberals and conservatives to join together in common causes that help people.
Tommy H. Simmons
I am writing in response to the July 3 letter “Constant barrage” and the July 5 editorial “An inclusive state” about Lt. Gov. Dan Forest.
The letter writer nailed it and voiced perfectly how many silent conservatives feel. We don’t tend to write snarky letters to the editor and the majority of us usually avoid politics. We are not necessarily in love with President Trump, but he’s doing exactly what he indicated he’d try to do in his 2016 campaign. His actions are what we’re interested in more than his words. Most of us are not against immigration when it is legal and the people want to assimilate.
That brings me to the editorial. I don’t know what is in Forest’s heart either, but having listened to him several times, he seems to have no problem with immigration if there is assimilation. I am reasonably sure if you read your history books, his statement about immigration without assimilation is factual, like it or not.
We’ve always had thousands of immigrants, except when President Dwight D. Eisenhower stopped immigration so the ones here had a chance to find jobs and housing and become citizens. They came legally and were given nothing free — they were on their own or depended on family for help. They worked hard, learned English, kept their money in the country, were eager to learn about our country and wanted to become citizens. How can returning to that process be less diverse and bad for our country?
I find it both ironic and wonderful that the iconic patriotic song “God Bless America” was written by a Russian immigrant, Irving Berlin.
Thank you for your editorial on diversity and multiculturalism on June 5 (“An inclusive state”).
Please submit letters online, with full name, address and telephone number, to Letters@wsjournal.com or mail letters to: The Readers’ Forum, 418 N. Marshall St., Winston-Salem, NC 27101. Letters are subject to editing and are limited to 250 words. For more guidelines and advice on writing letters, go to journalnow.com/site/forms/online_services/letter/