Bible Did Not Alter Prisoner’s Beliefs

You ran a couple of stories about (former Air Force) Lt. John Dickinson, the Amnesty International prisoner of conscience who spent the past year locked up for his refusal to participate in the slaughter of Iraq. I would like to add a couple tidbits of information that I find very confusing. John Dickinson is a gentle, caring man of peace, a teacher who loves his students and was willing to give up his livelihood, his family and his freedom to be true to his belief in peace and his abhorrence of war.

But the military was (angry) that he wouldn’t wave the patriotic flag and march to kill on command. So it locked him up. And it locked him up in his cell all day, month after month, with no activities, nothing to do and nowhere to go. The only thing he was allowed was the Bible.

I’ve been trying to figure this out. Was reading the Bible supposed to be the ultimate punishment? That seems disrespectful to such a historic document. Or was reading the Bible supposed to turn him into a man who was willing to kill on command, with no respect for his own moral and religious code of ethics? Is that what the Bible is about?

The funny thing was that he came out of prison having read the Bible from cover to cover. And he came out with his conscience, his belief in peace and his love of life and humanity intact. So much for “military intelligence.”

LINDA AGUILAR, Laguna Beach