A prisoner who has become a self-taught expert on hieroglyphics; trouble at the Crystal Cathedral; and analyzing the health of the U.S. healthcare system

Signs of life

Re “Ancient symbols speak to prisoner,” Column One, March 14

Having read a number of letters over time from Timothy Fenstermacher in the Biblical Archaeology Review, it was a genuine pleasure to “meet” him through the article in The Times.

I wish him well — he is an inspiration to those who want to turn their lives around but don’t know where to start.

As a teacher, it reinforces the message I try to give my students: Education is the key, not necessarily to riches but to success.

Thank you for a hopeful story among so many discouraging ones.

Lora Sigler

San Pedro

Ah, if only we all were assured of food, clothing, shelter and medical care, completely free to pursue our hobbies. What a sublime punishment.

Kurt Sipolski

Palm Desert

Church is more than a cathedral

Re “A shattering change,” March 13

In regard to the article, I have nothing against the Crystal Cathedral — or any church — that preaches God’s word, changes lives from the inside out and is a power for good in the local community. And I’m certain that at many times, the Schullers have done these things.

But nowadays, I think many people desire to worship at a place where the music is more contemporary, the dress a little more casual and the overall message more relevant to their lives. And the idea of a head pastor wearing some long, flowing robe, an overly gaudy and ornate setting, limos, lavish homes and the church being part of some “empire” — these are things that are generally a turnoff for families looking for meaning and purpose in their lives.

There’s a reason the contemporary, nondenominational churches are thriving here; they focus on teaching God’s word with relevance to a community starved to hear it.

Steve Cashion

Orange

Not broken? Not healthy either

Re “Healthcare wasn’t broken,” Opinion, March 15

I wonder if Christopher Conover realizes the financial problem with healthcare in the U.S.

Healthcare is a system that functions for the profit of shareholders, not necessarily for the benefit of the patient. Premiums go up twice a year, deductibles go up once a year and the coverage that insurance companies provide is being reduced.

Healthcare premiums are becoming unaffordable for the average citizen, and businesses are eliminating healthcare as part of their employment packages.

So, if healthcare is not revamped into a single-payer system, no one will be able to afford it.

John Hopgood

Studio City

When reading this article, one must take into account the provenance of the author, who is a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.

Guess what? He’s not incorrect in his analysis that he belabors with scant eloquence. Healthcare in the U.S. is highly advanced; however, what we have in this country is not a healthcare problem but a health insurance problem.

When for-profit insurance companies are removed from the equation, we will have a system that benefits the majority of our fellow citizens.

Kendall Marsh

Sherman Oaks

Any comment about U.S. healthcare quality that doesn’t mention the fact that there are tens of millions of Americans without health insurance is simply wrong.

Conover’s comments should have been prefaced: “For the fortunate few who have health insurance in this country, it’s not as bad as some say.”

We have Third World-class healthcare coverage — and that’s an insult to Third World countries.

Robert D. McConnell

Bermuda Dunes

The healthcare debate is not about the quality of medical care available in this country. To paraphrase the campaign slogan: “It’s the access to it, stupid!”

Jim Peterson

Beaumont

I didn’t get too far into Conover’s debunking of “conventional wisdom” before I began to wonder about his motives.

In his view, all of the comparisons between our healthcare and that of other countries are wrong, wrong, wrong.

I went online to find out more about his affiliations. It turns out that Conover is of the magical-thinking contingent that holds that everything, including healthcare, is best left to the “free market.”

My take is that this piece falls into the same category as the effort by tobacco companies to debunk the link between smoking and cancer.

Martin Parker

Thousand Oaks

Rule 1: Watch what you say

Re “The line Limbaugh crossed,” Opinion, March 15

It is true that Bill Maher has insulted Sarah Palin, but she is a public figure who put herself into the public square — and condemnation and reverence comes with the territory.

What crossed the line is Rush Limbaugh calling a private woman who desires birth control a “slut” and a “prostitute.”

It is not necessary to twist this story into a philosophical discourse on logic.

Christine Gregory

Beverly Hills

Columnist Meghan Daum’s fall-back excuse: Maher has a smaller audience than Limbaugh’s, so it’s OK for him to use unprintable filth while Limbaugh is hounded for words found in newspapers every day, and that women also use about one another.

President Obama has an audience of hundreds of millions, but Daum and Maher would never think of criticizing him for his countless substantive transgressions.

It’s not about language; it’s about destructive left-wing ideology.

Charles K. Sergis

Redondo Beach

Daum misses the point on the Limbaugh/Maher issue. Maher occasionally uses “bad words” (shudder!); Limbaugh used bad words and made substantive false statements (for example, “she wants to be paid to have sex”), which he developed as a theme over time.

If Daum is as offended by a bad word as she is by the substantive false statements by Limbaugh, we’re all in trouble.

She needs to stop acting like a poor sensitive little flower and take a look at the content of those sentences she’s remarking on.

Bob Burket

Santa Monica

Daum missed an important distinction. Both Limbaugh and Maher use extreme language, some of it outrageous and offensive. But Limbaugh crossed the line when he attacked a private citizen, a young woman exercising her right to express her views.

In an important sense, Limbaugh attacked all of us: men and women, daughters and those of us with daughters.

We expect Limbaugh and Maher to attack the high and the mighty. They are fair game, and brutal criticism is the price paid for demanding our attention and allegiance.

Limbaugh lost favor when he viciously attacked a powerless young woman. Attack “Obamacare” if you must, but attacking a young woman without the resources and platform available to Limbaugh was cruel and cowardly, as is the behavior of all bullies.

Sidney Morrison

Los Angeles