I just read “Eric Derleth Trial Lawyer” rant in the paper (June 2). Wow, he clearly expresses his anger. Anger is certainly appropriate in many situations. But I don’t get it. He wants to debate morality and religion. Societal morality enforcement has always failed when attempts are to legislate it. It just becomes a money maker for government. The pot issue is an excellent example. And as for religion, it is based on an individual’s faith. How do you debate one faith system over another? Religion is based on faith not facts.
And then he questions decisions of family members. I don’t know any of the individuals involved in this tragedy. But questioning what a family decides is out of line. Their loss was far more severe than his one-sided loss.
If Mr. Derleth wants to have a discussion or debate the issues, he should ask why, as a society, have we evolved to a point where an individual is so desperate to murder and then commit suicide (whether self inflicted or suicide by cop). Sure, he states suicide is an action of a coward. Is calling people names going to improve the underlying issues of murder and suicide?
While anger is appropriate in this situation, it is what people do with the anger that may be harmful. It appears Mr. Derleth’s anger has turned to bitterness and it will only harm him in the end. He needs to take his anger and generate some good. Start a debate/discussion on what we as a society should be doing to better give hope to individuals like Pastor Earl Moore.
That would be a true tribute to Lynda Moore. Then Mr. Derleth could say “Rest in peace, Lynda.” Perhaps understanding what generated such desperate behavior will help the next individual from destroying a human life. Recognizing a problem in our society is the first step to improving problems in our society. Debating morality and religion will not get Eric Derleth or us there.
