Readers thinking for themselves

Numerous were the responses emailed or texted to me (aside from those posted in Inquirer.net) on my column last Sunday, but I can print only three (edited to fit my limited space).

First, from Yvette San Luis: “…Sir, do you really expect Biden to UNITE all Americans in face of what his fellow Democrats are doing to Trump and his 74 million followers? So HATEFUL of them that they have no problem looking SO VERY STUPID trying to impeach an EX-PRESIDENT… Caravans… of mostly desperate and poor people from the South are now on their way… to America because Biden and his fellow Democrats are welcoming them with open arms…”

My reply: “…Not to defend Biden (for he is capable of defending himself), but he did not encourage Trump’s impeachment by the US House. Nancy Pelosi insisted on it and she was followed by all the House Dems and some Republicans. How this will turn out in the Senate remains to be seen.

“… The issue you mentioned, immigration especially of Latinos, and many others too, had been debated… during the last election. And the Americans, both the popular (Biden got 7 million more votes than Trump) and electoral (306-262), have already decided them in… the Dems’ favor. And while the minority can still disagree peacefully, it has the duty to follow. As Al Gore did in 2000…

“I do not expect Biden to unite ALL Americans. However, he had a problem that Lincoln faced. His approach is similar—reconciliation and unity. I hope he is not shot like Lincoln. I totally disagree with this method. The barrel of a gun should not settle an electoral disagreement. So, too, incited riots and chaotic mobs that sought to take over the seat of the US government have no place in the democratic space and in societies that believe in the rule of law.”

The second is from a lawyer: “…I enjoyed reading your column… However, would have been elucidating to comment on the whys of the disunity and the far-left agenda of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party vis-a-vis Trump’s demagoguery that is fueling the disunity (rather than a mere recitation of materials…). Eleanor Roosevelt once said: ‘Great minds discuss about ideas…’ Professor Randy David and J. Carpio seldom discuss about events per se, or about people. They discuss ideas. Hope you write the same…”

My reply: “…Randy David and Tony Carpio have their own way of writing their opinions, which I respect and I am sure they respect mine, in the same way that many others do, like Justice Conchita Carpio Morales, who wrote me:

‘What a contrast really Biden is with Trump. He came from a poor family, struggled to make both ends meet, went through a lot of personal grief and what would have been, to an ordinary person, demoralizing career circumstances, among other things. Unlike Trump who was born with a silver spoon, has a colorful personal life, never had any political post before becoming president. Yet Biden is cultured—his language, his bearing, his disposition, his attitude, unlike Trump who is rude, uncouth, clad with bad manners, a braggart and, worst, a LIAR. I don’t know if Biden’s being a Catholic has to do with his being what he is…’

“That is the kind of reaction I expect and often get, because it is provoked by the facts, scenario, (and often, the law) I outline. I expect my readers… to form their own opinions, add to what I have written and educate themselves in the process…”

The third is from Eddie Yap: “CJ, both Lincoln and Biden inherited a divided nation and both appealed for unity. Lincoln walked the talk and didn’t punish General Lee despite the horrendous casualties of the war… How far will Biden go to heal the nation? Or will it be the same tit-for-tat politics as in recent past?”

My reply: “… I am waiting also for Biden’s final position… There are many ways to exact accountability… impeachment… criminal cases, tax collection, and passage of legislations to disqualify from public office… Let’s see what Biden does and how he will tiptoe the delicate problem…”

In sum, my columns present relevant facts, conflicting claims, laws and jurisprudence that I hope will inspire readers to think critically and form their conclusions. I do not proselytize, indoctrinate, or impose. The freedom to think and to believe is boundless, while the freedom to act (and to write/speak) is limited by the Constitution and the laws. However, for us Christians, the Bible covers thoughts, words, and deeds.

——————

Comments to [email protected]