Regarding the Opinion page article "Voters' `New Tolerance' May Go Too Far," Sept. 29: I wonder why the author limits his moral criticism to Gov. Bill Clinton?
As a minister, I passionately believe in moral behavior. Our culture hurts for it. But why lower the moral boom on Mr. Clinton and look the other way when a host of entertainment stars as well as sports heroes live loosely? Will the author not ask Americans to boycott movies and stay away from sports events when players set bad examples? We indeed need a higher level of morality in our society - but across the board, please. James L. Ray, Franklin, Ind.
The author offers that voters' "new tolerance" may go too far. He refers to the widespread acceptance of Gov. Bill Clinton, notwithstanding his violation of the Seventh Commandment.
I am also concerned with too much tolerance. The Sixth Commandment states "Thou shalt not kill." There has been an incredible tolerance for President Bush's readiness to rush to war as an answer to problems. Hundreds of people were killed in Panama and great destruction was wrought, with no apparent diminution of the drug problem. In the Persian Gulf, thousands of soldiers, civilians, and children were killed during the war. Given these circumstances, it is hard to think that Mr. Clinton is the immoral c andidate and Mr. Bush the moral one. Robert A. Morgan, Palo Alto, Calif. Black voters
I was horrified to read the Opinion page article "Blacks Should Mobilize for Clinton," Sept. 29. The article states that the biased Reagan and Bush administrations never have and never will support blacks. Apparently the author blames these administrations for the fate of black people. I have never read in the Monitor such an outright racial attack on the current administration and goading blacks to back Gov. Bill Clinton. Bernice Erickson, Venice, Calif.
Letters are welcome. Only a selection can be published, subject to condensation, and none acknowledged. Please address them to "Readers Write," One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115.