Opinion & Blogs » Letters

letters

comment
With regard to your article "A Lasting Peace" by John Toivonen [News & Features, July 24], you are/will be/have been getting many complaints from Richmond Jews regarding this article.

I am a Jewish Richmonder who respects your publication and enjoys it. [But] when you publish the opinions of someone who is a religious leader of a particular faith, you have to make sure that he or she is generally regarded by the mainstream of the faith as being representative of that faith. This is where you ran into trouble.

Judaism (as others probably have already reminded you) has several branches. None of those branches acknowledge the messianic movement commonly called Jews for Jesus or Messianic Jews.

Anybody may call himself/herself a preacher or a rabbi. The problem comes from [Style] selecting a religious leader who is not considered a Jew by most Jews nor by sacred Jewish law.

It's a shame that this happened. I trust it was not intentional. If you are hit hard by tons of criticism, it is because so many Richmond Jews are avid readers of Style and want it to feature the best and truest coverage possible.

Betty A. Jaffee



I would like to express my outrage concerning your article "Lasting Peace." I can see you don't know anything about the Jewish community or you would have realized what an offense you committed by having a messianic shul ("Jews for Jesus") speak for the Jewish community.

When a Jew believes in Jesus they become a Christian and are no longer Jewish. Your chosen representatives do not represent Judaism or the Jewish people. I will be forwarding your article to national Jewish organizations.

Dennis Potter



Editor's Note: We regret that we did not make it clear that the congregation Mr. Cowen leads is part of the Messianic Jewish movement.



Smoked Out

Finally! A voice of reason. I am referring to Jimmy Sneed taking on the myth of smoking vs. nonsmoking in dining establishments ["Smoke Screen," Back Page, July 17]. The local powers that be would like you to think that going smoke-free hurts your business.

As a nonsmoker who often suffers in silence at a nonsmoking table right next to the smoking section (like that makes sense!), I would go out more often to bars and restaurants — if it meant not having to swallow a lungful to do so! My money (and I), therefore, stay at home or we find the nearest smoke-free eatery.

Richmond is stuck in the prehistoric when it comes to this issue — and it's, in the end, hurting only the restaurant owners who can't see the forest for the pall of smoke.

Leslie Layton



"Bravo!" to Jimmy Sneed for his piece on smoking in restaurants. I and my circle of friends have been asking this same question for years. Why can restaurants not see what he so artfully stated, that their business will improve if they ban smoking?

Jimmy, you stay right here in Richmond! I hope every restaurateur reads your article.

Craig Rupert



In response to Jimmy Sneed's "Smoke Screen," I would just like to say that many of Richmond's better restaurants that do allow smoking are already overcrowded. So if a few nonsmoking Nazis stay away, all the better!

As far as OSHA is concerned, this country is already over-regulated and groaning under the weight of governmental bureaucratic BS The last time I checked this was a free country!

Henry Reidy



Corrections

In the July 17 feature story, "Critics' Picks," we incorrectly referred to the ownership of Triangle Take-Out. The Plush family has owned Triangle Take-Out since 1952. To-ha Pak and his wife do not own the business but lease the property. They have kept many of the original menu items created by Samuel Plush.

In the same feature, we inexplicably referred to Poe's Pub as "Poe's Pantry and Pub." There is no pantry.

And in last week's feature, "That Was Then; This Is Now," we referred to Vander Warner as a "widower." However, he has remarried since his first wife's death.

Add a comment