DEI foes hide behind free speech
Slavery was bad. Racism is bad. Sexism is bad. Homophobia is bad. Nazism was bad. Fascism is bad.
Yes, those statements really are that simple. These are basic American — and human — principles established over many generations. This is basic morality, not factional political orthodoxy. Saying and supporting and working for those simple truths is patriotism, not “indoctrination.” But there are many, including a letter-writer (“DEI has it all backwards,” Nov. 26), who, in my view, want to support those things anyway.
Sadly, though, they won’t say so openly and proudly, but would rather hide behind claims that their free-speech rights are being oppressed somehow, and that those views are merely “alternative ideas” worthy of respect. But, except for a few cases such as the Charlottesville rioters, they don’t have the courage or sense of responsibility to say so directly and proudly.
You absolutely do have the right to free speech. You absolutely do not have the right to be free of consequences for your speech. That too is a basic American principle. If you oppose simple decency, do so proudly and take responsibility for it.
Brian Clouse Oviedo
DEI is education, not philosophy
A recent letter-writer (“Decisions on merit, not DEI,” Nov. 22) suggested that all Americans embrace diversity, equity and inclusion and “the wheels fall off” if DEI is a principal factor in employment. He suggests, commendably, that hiring should be based on merit. Among his other comments, he also suggests, again commendably, that we shouldn’t care about “the race, ethnicity or sexual orientation of the pilot flying your plane.”
However, when I hear a (verified) quote from a widely followed, conservative speaker who said “If I see a Black pilot, I’m gonna be like, ‘Boy, I hope he’s qualified,’” it’s pretty obvious that a lot of Americans do not embrace DEI.
DEI is not a philosophy; it’s an education. It’s, as the writer suggests, a reason to base employment and attitude entirely on merit and character and not be prejudiced by race, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
Jim James Winter Garden
Witkoff’s capitulation blueprint
The controversial U.S. peace plan to end the Ukraine war was, predictably, met with disdain in Kyiv and across major European capitals. President Donald Trump’s hand-picked “special envoy for peace missions,” is Steve Witkoff, a billionaire real-estate developer with virtually no expertise in foreign affairs. Witkoff is the principal architect behind what some experts are calling a capitulation blueprint. Claiming that Vladimir Putin is not a “bad guy,” he crafted a proposal which heavily favors Russia.
The plan, with its widespread demands for major concessions by Ukraine, is reminiscent of the Munich Agreement in 1938 which allowed Germany to annex a German-speaking region of Czechoslovakia. We all know how that instrument of appeasement, led by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, worked out — the aggressor, Hitler’s Germany, was emboldened, and nine months later Czech sovereignty was completely destroyed.
Jim Paladino Tampa
You can submit a letter to the editor by sending it by email to insight@orlandosentinel.com or by filling out the form below. Letters are limited to less than 250 words and must be signed (no pseudonyms nor initials).You must include your email address, address with city and daytime phone number for verification. Letters are subject to editing for clarity and length.
