Dislikes editorializing
I am writing in regards to an article of page 3 of the Jan. 13, 2021, issue of the Baptist & Reflector entitled “Greear, Moore, others call for peaceable transition.”
While I appreciate the work and efforts of the B&R staff and of the contributing writers, I do not agree with the editorializing by at least one of those interviewed. I am specifically speaking about the comments made by Albert Mohler in which he stated, “… President Trump is responsible now for unleashing mayhem.”
This is an unsubstantiated claim unsupported by any evidence (compare the timelines of President Trump’s speech that morning with the time of the attacks on the Capitol building), and it smacks of libel in assigning “responsibility” to him because of the criminal actions of a very small percentage of the several-hundred-thousand-person assemblage. To ascribe blame to the president for voicing his First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech when addressing the large crowds is irresponsible.
The printing of such disrespectful, salacious comments — to a sitting U.S. President — and uncorroborated opinions does nothing for your body of readers, the majority of whom I would surmise are conservative Christians. Americans are rightly angered over a fraudulent election in a country where the freedom to believe that one’s vote counts used to be a hallmark of our Constitutional Republic.
The B&R has a mandate to publish factual information. I would prefer that your paper maintain its non-confrontational stance — except in the case of moral issues such as abortion, infanticide, religious freedom, etc. – and continue to publish non-political op-ed pieces that are in keeping with Christian values and decorum.
— Donn Kraemer,
Hohenwald
Takes exception
I take exception to the biased reporting and comments made in the article by Scott Barkley, Baptist Press, entitled “Greear, Moore, others call for peaceable transition” on page 3 of the January 13, 2021 edition of the Baptist and Reflector.
I agree with J.D. Greear and Ronnie Floyd in their condemnation of “the mob’s” attack on the Capitol and their call for prayer and peace during the transition. Violence must always be condemned. I feel that the article was biased. To refer to the hundreds and thousands of peaceful protesters as a “raucous crowd,” tipped the hand as to where this article was going.
“The mob” should be condemned and prosecuted for their crime, but do not let their actions cast a shadow over the thousands of protestors peacefully exercising their Constitutional Rights to express their grievances. There still remain serious questions about the election’s integrity. An investigation is needed to restore trust in the election process. The article did not distinguish between “the peaceful protestors” and “the mob.”
In the article, only portions of the President’s speech were cited, which fed the bias and cast blame on President Trump.
In the haste to lay blame, they ignored his clear call to walk peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol, to show respect for the police, and to cheer on the Senators who were exercising their Constitutional rights to object to the electoral votes from states who had violated their own state Constitutions.
Legal authorities have ruled that there was nothing in the President’s speech that could be used to blame him for the riot. A timeline of the speech and the movement of “the mob” shows that the rioters were moving to the Capitol before the President had finished his speech. The mainstream media were quick to condemn President Trump before examining the facts, and so were those mentioned in the article. On Jan. 6, a few hundred individuals did the unthinkable, but the president was not to blame!
— Chris Ward
Livingston
