DEAR EDITOR:
Bertram Palmon revealed, in two letters, irresponsible, childish
name-calling/mudslinging, a refusal to understand declarative
sentences and a mindlock that ‘life begins at conception’.
DEAR EDITOR:
Bertram Palmon revealed, in two letters, irresponsible, childish name-calling/mudslinging, a refusal to understand declarative sentences and a mindlock that ‘life begins at conception’.
Now comes Diana Palmon – Bertram’s mother, sister, cousin, significant other, wife? (Letters – Aug. 3) carrying his banner as she uses the same language and refuses to understand declarative sentences and has a mindlock that ‘life begins at conception’.
Unlike Bertram, she advances several creative views: “We are talking a developing HUMAN here, not anything else.” Wrong Diana! What we’re talking is a growth within a female (the host) that becomes a human – “of relating to, or characteristic of man; consisting of men; having human form or attributes” – only after separation from the host and breathing independently.
Another: “(The process) is genetically the same being through all stages of development FROM CONCEPTION.” (Diana, do you and Bertram feel using capital letters really makes your mindlock more believable?) What relationship, Diana, does the genetic code have to do with ‘when life begins’? Be specific if you answer, Diana – not simply repeating by rote the same stale viewpoint already given.
It’s encouraging you’ve learned Psychology terms for your insults. Perhaps you might explain in what ‘major denial’ I’m in because I consider your view nonsensical, unproven and irrelevant.
In your final name-calling you exposed my motives, saying: “You sound like … a person who just enjoys annoying everyone. …” Not ‘annoying’ everyone, Diana, just bursting arrogant pomposity to challenge others to think, to show through their original thought that their view has merit. In Bertram’s case, he’s offered no support for his mindlock other than that BIOLOGICAL SCIENTISTS ‘proved’ him right. How? He never did say, only repeated his illogical idea ‘life begins at conception’. Your letter, despite the name-calling, at least presented several ideas worth considering – if not accepting.
What it comes to, Diana: For centuries leading theologians, educators, scientists, medical practitioners and even a wayward iconoclast or two have debated the question of where, how and when ‘life’ began – with never a definitive consensus.
I don’t consider Bertram’s myopic view on the question knowledgeable. You think the same toward my position – though you’ve yet to support your opposition with intelligent discourse. What you, Bertram and others sharing your mindlock need to understand, is the wisdom behind three words I acknowledge as I “enjoy annoying everyone” – three words no individual should deny: I don’t know!
You and Bertram say these words 30 times daily, Diana, until you overcome your overbearing smug arrogance of self-righteous silliness that claims ‘life begins at conception’. Repeat after me: I don’t know! Now accept it!
James Brescoll, Gilroy.
Submitted Thursday, Aug. 5 to The Dispatch.
