Sir: We would like to respond to Geoff Hall’s letter to the editor regarding his suggestion that Rick Nicholls step down.
We just have three points to make.
First, Mr. Hall suggested that Rick was not speaking with “our voice,” but perhaps Mr. Hall is unaware that there are hundreds (a minimum) of constituents that would agree with Rick’s statement that he does not believe in evolution. Rick simply responded to a question that was thrown out at him, and it is his democratic right to state what he believes. If he had agreed with evolution, would Mr. Hall have had the same problem with Rick stating his personal beliefs (when asked)?
Second, Mr. Hall spoke with disdain regarding Rick “exposing himself in all his medieval absolutism.” Rick in no way tried to force his beliefs on anyone, and Mr. Hall, in referring to Rick’s beliefs as being “medieval,” shows his ignorance of the fact that belief in a Creator existed long before the Middles Ages (medieval) and will endure long after all of us are gone.
Third, Mr. Hall stated that Rick was “ignoring the science of the millennia.” I feel sad that Mr. Hall seems ignorant that there is a whole area of science that not only views Creationism as probable, but a fact.
We want to add our applause in support of Rick for giving an honest, straight-forward answer when asked a direct question and we are grateful to have a representative in government who models what it means to exercise our right to freedom of speech.
Jim and Nancy Kostuk
Chatham
