[The Poet]

Reverend, you are absolutely right that the innocence of children does not display the same social and cultural failures so common in the supposedly mature. And you and I agree that there is but one race, which we are all a part. (The same could be said for the, perhaps, not so innocent sex play amongst children, which can be as "egalitarian" as the worst of adult degenerates.) It tempts one to wish youthful innocence could survive childhood, and the flawed lessons taught the young by their presumed "wiser" elders. Sadly, this is not the case, and as you have doubtless ministered to many sinners you know this. Parents teach their children, good and bad.

My point, as well or poorly as was my attempt to make it, was that a distinction need be made between racism and bigotry. The former exists, yet does not necessarily lead to bad actions. The latter too often does. Robertson's remarks about happy black field hands singing while toiling in high cotton, never expressing the slightest vexation towards Mr. Charlie . . . well, I don't care if he was working right beside them, and was only reporting what he witnessed. It is naive, it is offensive, and is at least on the "bad' end of racism, if not full-blown bigotry. And again, I repeat why this debate exists, not who is right or wrong. It is a debate because A&E decided it did not want to continue a relationship with this man. They may be right, they may be wrong, but why can they not do what they want? True, the Robertsons and their fans have the right to voice their disapproval of the decision, but they have no more right than does A&E, does GLADD, does the NAACP, or does little ol' tongue-tied me.

And the happiest of Christmas season to you, Rev, and to your family, your friends, and your flock.