Letters to the Editor A Double Standard To the Editor: Excuse me? Am I reading right? The Memphis Flyer, arch-advocate of freedom and the open society, warning us that some knowledge is too dangerous to be shared? Your editorial, "Firing Blanks" (May 18th issue) complains of gun-safety classes advocated by the NRA. "Right," your editorial warns, "in case there are kids out there who don't already have a fascination for firearms and a knowledge of how to use them, let's round them up and teach them!" Courses in sex education are good and necessary, because that's merely information, see, and besides, "everyone's going to do it anyway," but courses in gun safety nooooo! Too dangerous! Might foster an unhealthy fascination with the very subject it teaches! I don't own a gun, haven't fired one in over 30 years, and certainly don't wish to see them proliferate. But that's not the point. Your editorial is evidence that liberals are perfectly willing to be as repressive as the next person when it's a cause they don't agree with. Michael Huggins Memphis Very Funny To the Editor: I applaud the humor of Harry Moore. His Viewpoint article (May 11th issue) reminds me in some ways of Swift's A Modest Proposal, in which Swift "advocated" some rather unpleasant solutions to the Irish potato famine. He actually was proposing that the government take some action to alleviate the suffering. Moore, an American history instructor in a community college, must be advocating Bible studies rather than disparaging such coursework in the public schools. Why this perception? * The article mentions the 67 books of the Bible. The Protestant Bible has 66 books. I'm sure Moore can count. * The article mentions that the Bible is in error regarding the age of the Earth. The Bible does not give an age for the Earth. * Even ardent evolutionists admit it is a theory. Many gaps in the fossil record still exist. Evolutionary theory changes dramatically decade to decade. Facts don't change, but theories can change, something Moore, of course, knows. * Many philosophy courses include the teachings of Proverbs, Psalms, and Jesus Christ, just as the teachings of Buddha and Confucius are included. Each system addresses how to perceive and live life. I'm sure Moore has taken such philosophy courses in his studies. * If study of a subject is equal to advocacy, then American history cannot be studied because that would be equal to advocating representative democracy over communism or socialism. I doubt Moore advocates democracy as a superior system of government in his classroom instruction on American history. * "Theologically conditioned history" is one way of reading history, just as feminist history and social class history are means to interpret the events of the past. Moore certainly wouldn't teach history from just one perspective. * As Moore mentions, the Bible has a consistent theme of man's fall and redemption. He doesn't mention, because it would give away his tongue-in-cheek essay, the amazing fact that this consistency exists in a literary work that took 2,000-plus years to write, by 40-plus authors, in multiple languages, and over three continents. Thank you, Mr. Moore, for making such arguments for the study of the Bible. Since biblical illiteracy is so rampant in our secular, increasingly anti-Christian society, I just hope most folks can read between your carefully constructed errors and misinterpretations to read your real intent. Ted Miller Memphis A Satisfied Customer To the Editor: Pleasantly stunned #1: By your somewhat even-handed report on Jon Entine's recent book about racial and genetic differences in athletics ("A Taboo Subject," May 18th issue). I believe that those who try to minimalize the effect of genetics on human traits, disease, and behavior (e.g., homosexuality for conservatives, intelligence and athleticism for liberals) are going to have their worlds rocked when the results of mankind's greatest adventure, the human genome project, are analyzed early in this century. Hopefully the discussion will change from "Do genetic differences exist between groups of people" to "How can the knowledge of this diversity benefit mankind." Those who would suppress or ignore these questions in order to avoid feeding the fire of bigots should be ashamed of themselves. They seem to be as scared of these questions as some folks are of R-rated movies on their TVs. The so-called defenders of artistic freedom should also stand up for real scientific exploration even if it clashes with their worldview. Pleasantly stunned #2: That your first- and second-place barbecue sandwiches are also mine, though comparing the vinegary Bar-B-Q Shop and the sweet Interstate is like comparing apples and oranges. Two words: Texas toast. Chris Wood Memphis Ad Accomplished Its Goal To the Editor: In his Fly on the Wall column (May 22nd issue), Jim Hanas questioned the collective intelligence of local ad agency O'Connor Kenny Partners for taking pride in the fact that a Hard Rock Cafe billboard they created had been the subject of a write-up in People magazine. I would suggest that while Mr. Hanas is more than qualified to tell us about which county commission member got busted getting a lap dance at Platinum Plus, he is not qualified to discuss the finer points of advertising. As someone who has been in the ad business for more than a decade, I would like to respond. The ad, which referred to Keith Richards as a "fried item," did precisely what it was supposed to do. It made people laugh and got them talking. It entertained, which is more than most advertising ever does. I would wager to say that the only person who was offended was Keith Richards. If Hanas would do his homework, he would see that some of the most effective advertising in history was not without controversy. Apple's TV spot which introduced Macintosh was pulled off the air after running just once. It was an edgy spot that got a lot of press and set the Mac boom of the early '80s into motion. Taco Bell once ran a full-page newspaper ad with a photo of the Liberty Bell and copy that declared that in order to reduce the national debt, they had purchased the Liberty Bell and from now on it would be known as the "Taco Liberty Bell." It enraged some people, but in an ad the next day it was revealed to be an April Fool's joke. It offended some, but endeared the company to their younger target audience. There are many other examples, but what I'm getting at is give O'Connor Kenny credit for having the guts to create advertising that takes chances. Great advertising sometimes offends. Furthermore, the folks at O'Connor Kenny knew that using Keith Richards or any celeb name in a billboard would get them slapped with a cease and desist faster than you can say blood transfusion. They knew and you can be sure that the Hard Rock and their lawyers knew. The boards ran for a few weeks, got lots of press, and as long as they pulled them, Keith was satisfied. The point is, they knew the boards would be pulled, and in the process, publications would bite at the story and the aftermath. Just like Jim Hanas did. Dave Smith Birmingham, AL The Memphis Flyer encourages reader response. Send mail to: Letters to the Editor, POB 1738, Memphis, TN 38101. Or call Back Talk at 575-9405. Or send us e-mail at letters@memphisflyer.com. All responses must include name, address, and daytime phone number. Letters should be no longer than 250 words.