To the editor:

I'm all kinds of amused that I was the subject of a defensive diatribe by Mr. Fuller in this past week's Letters to the Editor, and just had to answer before I go back to my "leftist" life. By the way, "puritanical" was such a hilariously inept assessment of me that it just leaves me chuckling. 

I must admit to not having an American Civics class in middle school. The topic was not considered an essential course of study in the British educational system in which I was raised. As to US History,  it is entirely possible I was out sick the day that was covered. Regardless, over the years of my multiple degrees I have managed to gain a reasonable understanding of the historical context and contents of the US Constitution, and still don't think its concepts are contradicted by the signs, as Mr. Fuller seems to indicate by his ongoing referral to them. Indeed, quite the reverse.

If indeed our laws are our sanctuary, we wouldn't need to express the concern and sadness that those laws are currently being violated. The wide-ranging vilification of people with differing views, countries of origin, or sexual orientation is at the very heart of what is currently the climate of conservative America, and the antithesis of this country’s origins. 

Mr. Fuller repeatedly referring to the Constitution to validate why we shouldn't feel the need to express those concerns is, once again, completely missing the point. We do need to express them. Within the current climate of our society, as determined by the political administration that has been in charge since 2016, those civil liberties we “should” have are overshadowed by prejudice, fundamentalism, religious heavy handedness in a country that was founded on the separation of church and state, and an outrageous misuse of power. Individuals killed because of the color of their skin, women denied the ability to exercise their legal right to their own bodies, families torn apart for deportation, children “lost” in the system that wants to treat them as just so much illegal baggage, and a government that is not for the people but for the corporations, the wealthy, and the special interest groups. 

The Hate Has No Home Here signs are saying, that’s not okay, that’s not the climate we think is ethical, nor is it the climate of which the United States should be in the midst. Especially given this country’s origins and the tenets on which it was built, tenets which are still respected and valued by the majority of its people. 

Is Mr. Fuller saying America is only America if its views are those of the original 20? Seriously? 

I would argue that hundreds of years of "revisionist" legal changes, amendments, and reforms are what cause nations to thrive, including this one. The ideals, however, are still revered by the many. 

Twelve years before the Constitution was drafted, the United States birthed itself by declaring independence from Britain. In its opening, they declared, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” 

I embrace my own "impudence". If the founders of the United States didn't themselves exhibit impudence, your nation would still be part of mine. I would also contend that as someone who has lived in 10 countries and traveled in 6 out of 7 continents (Antarctica being the one missing), that my views are hardly myopic. 

I would venture a guess that Mr. Fuller just likes to hear himself talk. "Full of sound and fury, indicating nothing." 

As to the metanoia Mr. Fuller seems to think I need, it's a presumption lacking in veracity to determine that I need to undergo a shift in my spiritual views in order to understand his, which in itself is not only hypocritical but also corroborative of my original assertion that he was missing the point. Or maybe he just likes sounding obscure. I’m familiar with the Greek, and not impressed. 

I don't recall specifically referring to Mr. Fuller as being a white, male, Christian Republican nor did I at any point indicate individuals fitting this description would not be welcome in my home. 

Did I call Mr. Fuller a bigot or a racist? I must have missed that part of my letter. Regardless, if that is what he identifies as being, I wouldn't presume to dispute that. 

But Mr. Fuller, in answer to your question as to whether you would be welcome in my home, the answer is a definite no. Not because of your political or religious affiliation, or the color of your skin, or because you possess a penis, but because of your condescending, bombastic attacks on individuals you know nothing about beyond their support of the Hate Has No Home Here signs. 

Plus, you're really annoying and I have better things to do. 

With that said, it's clear we'll have to agree to disagree, but I would much rather forego further personal attacks.   I'm a nice person, but I also don't take abuse, and your letter was such. Just stop.

Lorna Steele

Barrington