your letters to editor of the Reporter, Vanessa
Bridge. Email email@example.com
or send by internal post to press office, 12.67
E C Stoner building.
letters will be considered for publication. We
will not as a rule publish 'round robin' letters,
letters that have been published elsewhere or
letters that have also been sent to University
colleagues for action. Letters may be cut (for
space) and we will indicate where this has happened.
If writers have asked questions, we will attempt
to answer them. If they assert things we know
to be untrue, we may add an editor’s note.
(from Jamie A Caryl, biological sciences)
I couldn't help but feel somewhat "invaded"
on reading the Letter from Barry Holroyd in the
Up until the penultimate paragraph, I would have
quite happily agreed with his point, although
it is perhaps a little arrogant to presume that
the public is somehow "tragic" because
it is not aware of the contents of the bible.
However, I found the last paragraph a little distateful
for this publication as I don't believe this is
the forum for attempts to propagandise Christian
rhetoric. That being said, it is somewhat contradictory
that he should cite the New Testament as a "primary
source" as this "source" is itself
not a contemporary record made by someone with
personal knowledge of the facts but is more a
report of the recollections of others; this is
not primary, and is subject to the same creative
licence and interpretation that Dan Brown has