Sidani column makes weak argument

Marwan Sidani’s column on March 6 made the most absurd argument floating around the political arena today. To draw a parallel between the actions of Arab and Palestinian terrorists, who target women and children at weddings and restaurants and the retaliatory warfare of the Israelis who take every precaution to avoid civilian casualties, is disgusting and ridiculous.

The death toll on the Palestinians side very well may be higher (but I doubt it). It may be because Hezbollah, who is funded by the Iranian regime, hides weapons and fighters in civilian households because they know the Israelis won’t attack them indiscriminately there.

It must be a difficult task indeed to defend against an enemy who teaches their children that Jews are animals and killing them earns one a place in paradise.

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Arabs have more rights there than in any of their own countries.

Mr. Sidani’s argument turns reality on its head. Not all Arabs are terrorists and not all Israelis have good intentions, but in terms of the basic principles driving each movement, the good guys and bad guys couldn’t be more obvious to any well-intentioned person.

BRADLEY ALEXANDER
Senior, Macon
Political science and Newspapers

Evolution as much a theory as gravity

In response to John Clark’s March 7 letter to the editor, no public institution should teach Creationism side by side with Evolution.

First, Mr. Clark argues there is not much difference between a belief (like creationism) and a theory (like evolution). However, if you have taken any science course before, you know many so-called “theories” often are synonymous with fact.

For example, the “theory” of gravity: for scientists, a theory is not simply a belief or guess. It is a consistently logical scientific model that explains a natural phenomenon.

Second, Mr. Clark addresses the idea that our nation was founded “under God.” Unfortunately for Mr. Clark, there is absolutely no mention of God in our Constitution, and the phrase “under God” only was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the 1950s.

Ms. Camp was right – our nation was founded on the deliberate separation of church and state.

If Mr. Clark still would like to insist our nation was founded “under God,” then he must ask the question, “Under which God?” This phrase, albeit religious, is non-denominational.

If we are forced to live in a nation “under God,” it certainly need not be the Christian God.

So I agree with Mr. Clark on his last point, that public schools should teach “all or nothing” — all of science or nothing at all.

Scientific theory in no way includes Christian, let alone any religious, belief, and therefore has absolutely no place in public education.

ISADORA MOSCH
Sophomore, Savannah
Philosophy

Editor’s Note: Don’t see your letter to the editor? Check our online mailbox at www.redandblack.com