Calvinism 101

I would like to remind those who believe a flat tax without deductions for charitable giving would stimulate giving ("God loves a cheerful giver," April 6) that the model of the 1980s cited was a time when charitable contributions were deductible. Anyone who would rely on the altruism of the masses to keep on giving without the financial incentives to do so needs to go back to Calvin 101 lessons on the total depravity of man. After all, God did not rely on the generosity of the Israelites but told them what they were to contribute. - Elizabeth Kata, Hackettstown, N.J.

Behavior manipulation

With regard to tax-deductions for charitable giving, there is another question that should precede the ones WORLD has asked: Should government use tax policy to manipulate the behavior of its citizens? The reason we now have the monstrosity called the federal tax code is because legislators have found it useful to manipulate the behavior of so-called "free citizens." The alleviation of poverty is an excellent cause for my charitable dollar, but should the government be trying to influence how I divide my dollar between an organization that serves primarily to propagate the gospel and one that serves primarily to feed the poor? One becomes a winner and one a loser based on the priorities of those writing tax laws. Let's try to get the flattest tax possible and let our charitable giving be completely free of tax law motivations. - Vicky Craig, Lufkin, Texas

Of course they're unified

Darwinists present a united front ("Doubting Darwin," April 13) because they, according to Romans 1:25, "have exchanged the truth of God for a lie." But we, who are redeemed by his grace, should not forsake God's word for the appearance of "a unified, rational response." - Louis Lavallee, Jackson, Miss.

One more reason

I believe Paul Weyrich ("Four more years," April 13) had the wrong reasons in explaining why Ron Wyden won the election in Oregon. It's probable that big labor had some influence, but the reason the Republicans lost was not labor; it was two small conservative parties running! If all of those people who voted for those third parties had voted for the Republican candidate, he would have won. Their total vote was 3 percent and would have made the difference! - Madeleine Hadden, Deerfield Beach, Fla.

Buck stops here

Regarding Bob Jones IV's April 13 interview with anti-tobacco lawyer Don Barrett: I am a 16-year-old who is trying to quit smoking, and it's tough. But I know that I alone am responsible, and in no way do I blame my addiction on any tobacco company. Mr. Barrett incorrectly stated that some kids who start smoking are too young to make responsible decisions. Children, starting in first grade in some places, are warned about the hazards of smoking. They know the risks, and what will inevitably become of them should they start or continue to smoke. But I guess that in this day of personal unaccountability, passing the buck is becoming more and more accepted. It's time for people to realize that the buck stops here. - Matt Post, Fremont, Mich.

Whose creeds?

I respectfully disagree with William H. Smith's objection ("The boundaries of unity," April 20) to "center-set thinking" as not being unitive or apostolic. Mr. Smith seems to favor "boundary-set thinking," in the forms of statements of faith and creeds. The question is: Who draws them up? - Victor Knowles, Joplin, Mo.

Fervent prayer

When President Clinton assured Congress he knew he was right to veto the bill banning partial-birth abortions because he had "studied and prayed about this issue," (March 9) I was doubtful. How could the God who created babies in the womb approve of their destruction? Then, while visiting Moscow's Red Square April 20, Clinton was heard addressing his Creator when he said, "God, I love this place." I hope his own country, the free and democratic country he is leading, inspires him to pray with equal rapture. - Amy M. Givler, Monroe, La.

Don't ask, don't tell

Yes, I'll concede the pragmatism of Marvin Olasky's argument ("The third-party temptation," March 30) for supporting Bob Dole. As a frustrated voter, however, I can't help wondering if our modern attraction to pragmatic compromise brings God's kingdom anything more than "don't ask, don't tell" faith before a fallen world. Total separation won't work, but win or lose we are called to be as distinctive as Daniel. Would Daniel have prayed secretly in exchange for tax relief? - S.F. Toole, Manama, Bahrain