Readers Write: (Dec. 10): The story of Genesis, the long war, torture, the police, Stephen Wilbers

I read Neal Justin's review of "The Red Tent" ("Sisters are doing it for themselves," Dec. 7). He wrote: "No matter how much you try to beef up the roles of the Genesis gals, their stories have a hard time living up to the trials and tribulations of Jacob and his favorite son, Joseph."

I'm sure he made that statement in good faith, but gee, is he ever wrong.

Jacob held his place only due to the courage and determination of his mother, Rebekah. God told only Rebekah that her younger son, Jacob, was chosen by God, rather than her oldest son, Esau. Against all tradition, and with absolutely no legal or civil standing, Rebekah had to find a way to make that happen. At the risk of her livelihood and even life, she did just that. A distortion of the story that begins in Genesis 25:23, deliberately sanctioned by the Roman Catholic Church as part of its early efforts to devalue women, has painted Rebekah as a jealous, trickster mother who deceived the dying Isaac. Not at all true. You can read that story, in addition to Rebekah saving Jacob's life, in the 27th chapter of Genesis.

Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel and Leah were women of extraordinary courage and strength, with none of the resources of the men. Those women carried forth the lineage of the people of the covenant according to God's plans.

There is much more, but not the space here to tell it. I urge Justin to read Genesis more carefully. What is really written there sometimes differs from conventional Biblical wisdom.

I attended my first Advent event on Sunday. During the "reflection," the speaker listed "dark" aspects of our world: the Ebola outbreak, global warming, the situation in Ferguson, Mo. While all these are crises, I was dismayed that our 13-year-old war in Afghanistan was not mentioned, nor was the war in Iraq and its resulting ISIL threat.

I realize that a U.S. combat role in these wars is officially over; nonetheless, the Star Tribune's pages suggest that they will go on for "at least two more years."

Tuesday's release of the U.S. Senate investigation into the use of torture is another reminder of our longest wars, since we would not have been involved in torture were we not at war.

It's long past time to bring our troops home and quit sending them every time there's a world crisis. War is not the answer to the world's problems.

Now that we have the sickening report on CIA torture, I can say that I'm now a full believer in American exceptionalism, in that we have excepted ourselves from the standards of decent civilized humane behavior. I am ashamed that my country has done this.

• • •

The right question about torture is not "Was it effective?" or "Was it legal?" or "Is releasing the report justified?" The right question is: "Who have we become?"

• • •

No other country in the world would publicly provide negative information about its flaws. But such has been the case of the oversight committee headed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein that is taking the CIA to task for its treatment of potential enemies of ours. The openness on our government's part is truly gutsy. Some of us would disagree, but that's what makes us a free society.

We have freedom, and we are getting even more free. Every day I thank my lucky stars that my family "made the boat" in the early 1900s. God bless our wonderful United States of America.

A Dec. 8 letter writer, in offering "three simple lessons" about interacting with police, states that the way to stay alive is to immediately, without question, obey authority figures.

Think about that for a moment — immediate, unquestioning submission, under penalty of execution. For exercising a citizen's rights.

1) The police work for us, not the other way around.

2) Their job is to protect and serve, not rule, nor serve as judge, jury and executioner.

3) They are, or should be, subject to the same laws as everyone else.

The writer is advocating for a police state, and Martin Niemoller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...) had some thoughts about where that inevitably ends.

• • •

I applaud the Star Tribune for reversing its earlier decision to drop the excellent "Effective Writing" column by Stephen Wilbers. I realize that it must be challenging to be in the newspaper business in this electronic day and age, and that decisions on how and where to make cuts in the budget always displease someone. However, I believe editors made the right call in reconsidering the decision and keeping Wilbers' column after initially deciding to stop publishing it.

His column serves such a wide audience, from professionals to laypersons just wanting to better their writing skills. Thank you again. I am delighted at the decision.

• • •

I get three things from Wilbers' column:

1) I learn something new.

3) I get some good humor with the lessons.

I am very happy to see it continue.