BLAMING AND SHAMING Haggard acts like lawyer rather than pastor After reading the sad story about the Rifkin family, I was disgusted with the news in the days that followed. Why does Pastor Ted Haggard have tough questions for Memorial Hospital (“Pastor blames hospital for murder-suicide,” Metro, April 28)? Why has Don Rifkin agreed to release his wife’s medical records to New Life Church: Is it now operating a law firm? Why is this pastor behaving like a lawyer rather than a man of God? I feel deeply for Rifkin and his family. It appears his church is going to turn this terrible tragedy into some sort of legal nightmare. If Haggard is so interested in playing lawyer, maybe the focus should be on gun laws. It is disturbing that it is so easy to obtain a gun. Since Julie Rifkin had no criminal record and had not been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility, she was instantly approved for the gun. If a waiting period was in place in this state, this story would have had a different ending. Gretchen Whitworth Colorado Springs Let’s focus on healing, not fixing blame Why is it that Rev. Ted Haggard is so quick to point a finger at Memorial Hospital? If the reverends and pastors of the churches in this area had their feet planted firmly into the care and feeding of their congregations, rather than politics, tragedies such as the Rifkin family might not happen. Instead of pointing fingers at Memorial, should we be pointing at the community of Colorado Springs that failed the Rifkin family? It’s time to begin the healing, not continue the hurting. Should area churches focus on relationships and healing and caring for their congregations or be political action groups? I vote for the first choice. Karen Rundquist Colorado Springs Blaming hospital for deaths is pure speculation The Monday-morning quarterbacking by the Rev. Ted Haggard is way out of line. The question is, where was the good reverend when Julie Rifkin needed him? To blame a hospital for not keeping someone who may not have exhibited any trouble signs to them is ridiculous. For Haggard to say the hospital should have kept her 72 hours and they would all be alive is pure speculation; she could have easily done the same thing after the magical 72-hour hold at the hospital. If the friends of the family were with Rifkin for those 72 hours, I think the family would still be alive today because she would have realized she still had friends who cared enough to be with her and there was still hope. Jack Ayers Colorado Springs Could pastor have done more to save three lives? I am offended that the Rev. Ted Haggard would start tossing out accusations about who is responsible for the terrible Rifkin family tragedy. Has he looked in the mirror? I would like to ask him, and other community religious leaders, what they do for their members when they are in trouble. Haggard professes that he is upset over how Memorial Hospital treated the situation, but what did he do? Did he offer financial as well as emotional assistance to this struggling family? Was he or any other church member by Julie Rifkin’s side when she needed someone? Jennifer Beau-Catterson Colorado Springs FOCUS ON THE FILIBUSTER Democrats change tune on ‘counting all the votes ’ The ever-increasing hypocrisy of the left never ceases to amaze me. For at least five years, they have been carping about how we need to “count all of the votes.” In 2000, the votes in Florida were counted four times but Al Gore wanted to keep counting until he got his desired result. In 2004 John Kerry seemed to think that he would have won if we had just “counted all of the votes.” However, when it comes to President Bush’s judicial nominees, the Democrats suddenly lose their devotion to counting the votes. In fact, they don’t want to allow these qualified judges a vote at all because they know they easily would be confirmed by the entire Senate. Thanks to the Democrats’ unprecedented use of the filibuster to block appeals court nominees, Bush has received the smallest percentage of confirmations of any modern president. All of these blocked judges are mainstream, having won broad approval across the country, including in some very liberal places such as California. The Democrats in the Senate, however, will not allow judges to be confirmed who will interpret the law as they should instead of ramming a leftist agenda through the courts. Patrick K. Nolan Colorado Springs Should Democrats be ignored because GOP is ‘in charge?’ I am fascinated and amazed at the comment of LeRoy Gray, “The Democrats should get a life; they lost the election and we Republicans are in charge” (“GOP should call Democrats’ bluff on threatened filibuster,” Letters, April 28). From his comment it sounds like since the Republicans are “in charge,” the opinions of dissenters should be ignored. While it seems the administration largely shares Gray’s harsh judgement, there are growing signs the Republican reign might be having problems. President Bush, poster boy for the Christian right, is suffering from the lowest job approval ratings of his administration. Some moderate Republicans have recently understood they need the opposition for government to function properly. The House Ethics Committee has finally seen sense enough to withdraw the previous rules that had been enacted exclusively to protect Rep. Tom DeLay from investigation. Perhaps there are some in the Republican Party who understand majorities come and go. Something they enact now for their benefit might just come back to haunt them in the future. Doug Blackman Colorado Springs Stay out of politics or give up tax-exempt status It is time for Focus on the Family to start paying taxes. The recent exchange between the so-called religious organization and Sen. Ken Salazar proves it is not a taxexempt religious group, but a lobbying organization bent on political change. As such, it should immediately give up its taxexempt status and start paying its fair share. The same could be said for many socalled religious organizations found here in El Paso County. When Catholic bishops start telling their congregations how to vote, it is time for them to lose their tax-exempt status. The same should apply to all religions who try to persuade or coerce the public. Separation of church and state must be upheld. We certainly don’t need a theocracy like the ones we are trying to overthrow in the Middle East. Religion and politics should never mix. Look at the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem witch trials. Ted Spaid Colorado Springs Writer seemed confused about stymied judges I thought Jim Trione’s claim that James Dobson and Republican leaders were attempting to place judges on the bench “who adhere more to biblical allegory than a strict constructionist view as the Framers intended” was bizarre (“Americans fear government based on religion,” Letters, April 27). The battle over judicial nominations is between Republicans (and Dobson) supporting the nomination of strict constructionists versus Democrats who prefer so-called progressive judges willing to impose their own beliefs and legislate from the bench. Since I’ve never heard of any of the filibustered nominees advocating or using biblical allegory as a basis for judicial decisions, I have to conclude that the letter writer and Dobson are really on the same side — the side of strict construction. Moral: Don’t let your hatred of religious people get the better of you; it can make you crazy. Alan Pollard Colorado Springs