His first offense: use of

the words "lifelong Republican" in a campaign

mailing. She devotes her more forceful comments toward

decrying his writing the following which appears in the

Fayette/Coweta insert of the Atlanta

Journal-Constitution: "...this community should have

`one of their own' serving on City Council - namely

a married, average-income professional who is raising

children in a Christian environment.... the leaders of

the city should be an accurate reflection of the people

who live here and who share the same values."

Ms. Satterthwaite writes

that herein she hears code words: "I hear

exclusion." Then she goes beyond writing what she

"hears" to confidently, and presumptuously,

asserting to know the candidate's heart.

Ms. Satterthwaite starts

six sentences with the words, "You don't mean."

In these sentences she portrays the candidate as opposing

(among others) underpaid single moms, widowers, Chinese

restaurateurs, disabled attorneys, Hispanics, Muslims,

Buddhists, Jews and, "probably" Catholics. At

least she qualifies the last charge.

So while we readers can

figure the candidate guilty of ethnocentrism, classicism,

anti-Semitism, and xenophobia; on the charge of being

anti-Catholic, we can merely hold him suspect. Having

found the candidate guilty of these crimes, Ms.

Satterthwaite calls for voters who classify their race as

"black" or "other" to exercise

sentence by joining her at the polls on Nov. 2 to vote

against him.

Taking the whole of Ms.

Satterthwaite's opinion piece, she seems to value the

virtues of community and inclusion; noting her admittedly

admirable civic activism; lamenting the loss of common

courtesy on the cartways; decrying an increased use of no

trespassing signs.

While loving community, she

negatively stereotypes a man rearing his family in our

community. The sole basis for impugning this man's

character - his use of the words, "lifelong

Republican," and words which she interprets as

containing code. Rather than taking these words at face

value, she suspects evil intent. I dare assert that most

readers did not view the same words as code requiring

deciphering.

When the candidate writes

of raising children in a Christian environment, some may

understand that to mean that he tries to live by the

words of a Jew spoken almost 2000 years ago: "So in

everything, do to others what you would have them do to

you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets (Matt 7:12

NIV)." This Jew also quotes Leviticus 19:18 when

saying that the second greatest commandment is to love

our neighbor as ourselves; the greatest being the

beginning of the Jewish Shema (Deut 6:5) to love God with

all of our being (Matt 22:37-40).

Elsewhere (Luke 10:25-37)

someone asks the Teacher who qualifies as a neighbor. He

tells the story of thieves beating a man and leaving him

half dead. Two members belonging to the higher

socioeconomic class pass the wounded man without

rendering aid. Only a member of a religious and ethnic

minority largely despised by those hearing the lesson, a

Samaritan - the Good Samaritan - bandages the

traveler's wounds and pays for his recovery.

Do such teachings present a

threat to inclusivity; to our pluralistic democracy? Of

course my respect for these teachings may give me an

unrealistic positive prejudice toward this candidate, yet

when Ms. Satterthwaite presumes the worst possible

connotation from this candidate's words - one

counter to their usual meaning - she herself seems

to behave illiberally. I have to ask her to examine her

own heart to see if she might not have presumed and then

published from prejudice.

Eric Ferrell

[email protected]

<!-------------