LETTERS: EDITORIAL'S CONCLUSION WAS BASED ON FALLACY

To the editor:

You June 13 editorial, "Book issue isn't settled yet," contained an egregious fallacy followed by a false conclusion, false because it was based on the assumption that the first fallacy would be presumed to be accepted as fact.

The second sentence of the third paragraph is totally at variance with the contents of the chapter of the book quoted at the center of the controversy. The substance of this chapter is a parody, a lampoon of the attempt to push the use of condoms as a way to prevent the spread of disease and the supplying of condoms to schoolchildren.

The last sentence of the last paragraph is a false conclusion because it assumes that there was something prurient or otherwise objectionable in the text.

You can only come to your conclusion if you accept the premise of the teacher and school board of Montvale School without question, without checking the source. The Montvale School people could only arrive at their conclusion if they had failed to read the text or if they were automatically rejecting the source for ideological, politically correct reasons.

Even the most cursory reading of Rush Limbaugh's book, particularly that chapter, would demonstrate even at the fourth-grade level that the content was diametrically opposite of what they claimed, so that this whole uproar was a result of complete ignorance and a total lie.

If you have read it and still maintain your support for their action and claims, then my opinion of your judgment, both of the moral issues and the facts, has been dealt a severe blow. I'm satisfied the Montvale School people hadn't read it, and if they have by now, they will never admit that they hadn't.

JACK PROFFER

Cape Girardeau