Learn to pronounce the name of our city and other letters to the editors

Learn to pronounce the name of our city and other letters to the editors

August 18th, 2013 in Opinion Letters

Learn to pronounce the name of our city

It is funny how people are always saying if you live in this country "learn to speak English."

We have people who live here in this city, and they cannot pronounce Chattanooga. Some have lived here over 20 years and still say Chatt-Nooga.

I understand that some of these people come from other locations, but please give this great city a little respect.

President Obama came to visit here recently, and whether you like him or not, at least he knew how to pronounce Chattanooga correctly.


Hypocrisy abounds in Rants column

I might find time to be angry if only I could stop laughing! The reader responses in the Sunday paper Aug. 11th are fraught with hypocrisies.

One ranter wrote, "The tea party has constitutional rights to assemble peacefully. That is what they did. Deal with it."

I wonder, did this ranter take the same attitude when the Occupy movement camped out on the courthouse lawn?

Or were you crying out for their swift removal? If so, you are a hypocrite.

They were lamenting the termination of Drew Johnson. I enjoyed his articles and had no problem, even as a supporter of our president, with the headline. My problem is with the hypocrisy of the writers who lambasted the leaders of the paper for terminating him for expressing his viewpoint in an (arguably) inappropriate way, while going on to state that you should fire Clay Bennett because they find him too offensive. Hypocrisy!

Sorry, folks, you can't have it both ways. I find Mr. Bennett's cartoons enjoyable and poignant. The fact that he strikes such a nerve on a regular basis just tells me that he is on to something.

Sometimes the truth hurts.


Some views on local stories

Thank you, Times Free Press, for enforcing your standards of headline writing and having the courage of your convictions in firing Drew Johnson. I'm sure this was a controversial decision at the paper. It was the right one, setting and following your own rules ethically.

David Cook, your article on the cost of the crosses under construction was spot-on. Does any religious organization truly think that spending $700,000 on their particular version of

evangelicalism is better than using it for any of the purposes he listed? Providing clean water, helping the homeless and feeding the poor seem more important to me than advertising.

On another note: What is all the flap about unions at Volkswagen? How many people who have strong opinions about whether or not there should be a union there will be directly affected? The police and firefighters have unions. Football players and electricians have unions. Are they problems for the average citizen, too? The employees get to decide, and only their views matter.

Now, TFP, does a bowl of fruit on the side of Signal Mountain really warrant front-page coverage? Come on, you can do better than that. And mostly you do.


Libertarian views ruffled feathers

As a Democrat and avid fan of both editorial pages, I am grateful someone ("Strong Republican" Aug. 9) finally noted that Drew Johnson's opinions were libertarian and thus bound to ruffle the feathers of traditional conservatives on many social issues, such as same-sex marriage, legalization of drugs, etc. I disagree with "Strong Republican" that a more flattering tone to the headline would not have led to the dismissal. The paper stated Mr. Johnson rewrote his original headline after it had been approved by his editor and noted he had written many editorials strongly critical of the president. I take the editors at their word. I do not believe, however, that this rule violation was the sole reason for the firing. The publisher surely knew what he was getting when Johnson was hired and approved the appearance of so many opinion pieces from the libertarian Cato Institute during Johnson's tenure ( that disappeared). It is more likely that the offending headline was the last straw or excuse after a host of editorials critical of Senators Alexander and Corker for bipartisan positions, such as support for local taxation of Internet sales, as well as broadly favored local government initiatives.

A steady diet of libertarian opinions probably evoked more howls from conservatives than from liberals.


Judge meddled in name change

I am puzzled as to why a great many of Tennessee's citizens are opposed to the NSA's "spying" on their telephone numbers when their own court system recently intruded into a Tennessee couple's personal business. A child-support magistrate and a judge in Newport, Tenn., each spoke against the parents' decision to name their very own baby "Messiah." Their choice was made because it blended well with their two other sons' names; and in the last few years, the name was ranked between 400th and 1.000th in popularity of baby names on annual listings.

My questions are: Since when can public servants defend a name change based on their personal religious belief that this name is a title reserved solely for Jesus? Is a judge

meddling when she bases her legal decision on her personal opinion that, one day in the future, a child with the name Messiah "could put him at odds with a lot of people." Is she also a fortune teller? Has there ever been a problem with the name Jesus, a popular moniker for boys? What about Mary for girls? What about "Virgin" as in the airline? Ponder that!


It's OK to set aside partisan politics

Recently Jim Hall wrote a very informative article regarding several issues of great importance to all Americans.

One could agree or disagree regarding his assessment of how our government functions.

I know Jim to be what I would consider a moderate Democrat.

As he knows, I am a moderate-learning Republican. Yet Mr. Hall lays aside partisan politics to be openly critical and objective about our current administration.

Far too long we have had the opinion we must remain steadfastly loyal to our chosen party and overlook the truth on subjects that should be closely scrutinized. Mr. Hall is doing

what so many of both parties try to avoid: being objective.

When we turn a blind eye at the actions or lack of within any government agency, that should transcend party loyalty, and I am proud to say Mr. Hall has done so.

In all too many cases we fail to speak out simply because we feel it will fall on deaf ears and do no good. But if we all sit on our hands and never speak out about anything of which we are in disagreement, then those in charge will have their way with us. And then we deserve the consequences.

W. LANNY McNABB, Signal Mountain

Crosses provide bold proclamation

David Cook's commentary on the expense of giant crosses, and his ideas for better use of the money was interesting.

I don't know the hearts of those at The Crossing Church inspired to build these crosses, or how God will use them, but I know the cross is a beacon of hope, the symbol of Christian

faith. It symbolizes the love of God in offering salvation through faith in Christ's death and resurrection. Dr. Michael Youssef, in his book, "When the Crosses Are Gone: Restoring Sanity to a World Gone Mad," writes that we're "a culture increasingly hostile to the cross. By increments, we're departing from the truth.

The cross of Christ is the greatest expression in history of one love for all people."

God's heart for the poor is evident in the Bible. Jesus' story of the good Samaritan exemplifies true Christian love. Compassionate, seeking to meet physical and spiritual needs of others. As important as physical needs are, spiritual needs are greater, deeper and eternal. As we pass by the crosses, remember the message, "You need a Savior."

Hallelujah for this bold proclamation and witness to God's saving grace and the power of the cross! Glory to God!


Crosses can help some turn to Jesus

David Cook, in an article on Aug. 9, wrote of all the things the money spent for three crosses at the Crossings Church.

I read of another man who talked the same way in the Bible. His name was Judas Iscariot. When Mary anointed Jesus's feet with the costly ointment, Judas said the ointment

could have been sold for 300 pence and given to the poor.

Jesus said. "Let her alone, the poor ye have with you always."

Jesus also said in Mark 9:36, "What shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul." If one person with a troubled soul sees those crosses, realizes there is hope in Jesus, and is saved from going to hell for eternity, that is worth more than the whole world. I pray that many troubled souls will see those crosses and turn to Jesus for salvation or help in time of trouble.