So this guy, Paul Weinbaum, has been suing our city and school system because we use 3 crosses on emblems.
Our city is named Las Cruces (the crosses).
Most of the people in our city like the emblem & don't care for Weinbaum's lawsuits, I am one of those person's that like the emblem.

I've written a letter/email to him, would y'all be so kind as to proof read/make suggestions on it?  Thanks in advance

[quote]In regards to law suit you have filed concerning our city emblem, why continue this?  Do you believe it is possible to remove all religious symbols and names from our government agencies?

I agree with what the Sun-News has found to be the majority opinion of Las Crucens, the crosses ought to stay.  Your cause is taking money away from more important matters.  I'm sure we'd all rather have potholes fixed, streets a little cleaner, and other things like that.  I agree, the crosses are a religious symbol, but I do not see Las Cruces as a city sponsoring Christianity.  Can you honestly tell me that Las Cruces, as a whole community, would be better off with out 3 simple crosses on our logo?  If you believe so, please answer me this, ought we change the names of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, and even New Mexico?  As I read Mexico is named after Mexitli, the Aztec God of War, that could make people think we are the new followers of this Aztec God, should we be instilling the Aztec religion into our society?


[/quote]

You'd have more of an effect if you took a humbler approach.  The persona you give off is a highly arrogant one.  :-\  A great example of humbleness would be Martin Luther King Junior's "Letter From Birmingham Jail."  If you disregard the length of it, King does a very good job at arguing his case.  You can see that throughout the letter, he was careful to not offend anyone.  Nearing the end, he maintains that humbleness which I found to be very effective.

Maybe it'll work for you?

[quote author=Explicit[nK] link=topic=14549.msg148719#msg148719 date=1142834472]
You'd have more of an effect if you took a humbler approach.  The persona you give off is a highly arrogant one.  :-\  A great example of humbleness would be Martin Luther King Junior's "Letter From Birmingham Jail."  If you disregard the length of it, King does a very good job at arguing his case.  You can see that throughout the letter, he was careful to not offend anyone.  Nearing the end, he maintains that humbleness which I found to be very effective.

Maybe it'll work for you?
[/quote]yeah, after reading it outloud I noticed that, my dad did too.


rewritten to come across less obnoxious myself
[quote]In regards to law suit you have filed concerning our city emblem, why continue this?  Do you believe it is possible to remove all religious symbols and names from our government agencies?

I agree with what the Sun-News has found to be the majority opinion of Las Crucens, the crosses ought to stay.  Your cause is taking money away from more important matters.  I'm sure we'd all rather have potholes fixed, streets a little cleaner, and other things like that.  I agree, the crosses are a religious symbol, but I do not see Las Cruces as a city sponsoring Christianity.  Can you honestly tell me that Las Cruces, as a whole community, would be better off with out 3 simple crosses on our logo?  If you believe so, please answer me this, ought we change the names of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, and even New Mexico?  As I read Mexico is named after Mexitli, the Aztec God of War, that could make people think we are the new followers of this Aztec God, should we be instilling the Aztec religion into our society?[/quote]

My only suggestion now is to be a lot more specific in your examples.  Possibly an analogy or two that will really stand out?

Your revised letter is significantly better than your draft.  You cannot expect to have someone listen to you if your tone is too argumentative or condescending.  Also, you've cut away a lot of writing and left your best point :).

I agree with your stance on this as well.

[quote author=Rule link=topic=14549.msg148722#msg148722 date=1142835942]
Your revised letter is significantly better than your draft.  You cannot expect to have someone listen to you if your tone is too argumentative or condescending.  Also, you've cut away a lot of writing and left your best point :).

I agree with your stance on this as well.

[/quote]Yeah, I thought that too.

[quote author=Explicit[nK] link=topic=14549.msg148721#msg148721 date=1142835506]
My only suggestion now is to be a lot more specific in your examples.  Possibly an analogy or two that will really stand out?
[/quote]
More specific where?
I believe the part about changing the name of all religious government related things "hits home", or at least should.  Who is going to agree with changing the name of a state?

Oops, I meant for you to provide more specific examples.  Perhaps a few quotes from people you've interviewed/talked to regarding this issue?

You could also ask him somewhere what difference the removal of the emblem would make compared to now, and perhaps try to evoke out of him a better reason other than one pertaining to religion.

Local paper did a poll & said majority of people like the crosses, I'm sure he has read it, he seems to be an active dude.

[quote]You could also ask him somewhere what difference the removal of the emblem would make compared to now[/quote]...?  compared to now?

His big thing is that it is against the First Amendment.
"Too much religiosity was going on here and throughout the country to just be idle. I had taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic; I have not been relieved of that oath."-him

I agree, but not something as trivial as this

Wow, could he be anymore greedy?

Remove "politically motivated crap". If you can't bring yourself to, then at least remove 'crap'.

I agree with Rule; your revised letter is much better than the original, but you should still bear in mind the following:

- No one is receptive to being insulted. If you really want to change his mind or influence him in any way, you will get nowhere by calling him names and insinuating that he is motivated by politics and not principle.

- Keep your letters short. This one looks a little long; I think things could be cut from it. He probably gets lots of mail, if your letter is concise and to the point, it's far more likely to be absorbed.

- Use arguments that are likely to be accepted, or at the very least, that he hasn't addressed perviously. I find it unlikely that he will care that a majority of people disagree with him (I'm assuming he's not an elected official). You'll much better off making an argument based on principle than saying that most people think he's wrong.

- Don't give him advice. Regardless of whether or not your advice is correct or useful, it will not be absorbed, because you are not offering it from a position of credibility. If you were an expert in a particular area that involves this lawsuit, you might be able to get away with it -- I'm assuming you aren't.

I have some experience writing these kinds of letters -- I'm not just bitching. HTH.

The name of the town is Las Cruces (The crosses)...

People these days don't know what to protest/fight against.

[quote author=Shout link=topic=14549.msg148839#msg148839 date=1143002165]
The name of the town is Las Cruces (The crosses)...

People these days don't know what to protest/fight against.
[/quote]It can also be intrepretted as "the crossroads"


thnx Arta.  I'll go through my revised letter again and look at it more.

FWIW, using the fact that more people support your point of view than do his to try and make your argument is a logical fallacy. The majority opinion is not a logical fact.

[quote author=Zakath link=topic=14549.msg148987#msg148987 date=1143146485]
FWIW, using the fact that more people support your point of view than do his to try and make your argument is a logical fallacy. The majority opinion is not a logical fact.
[/quote]FWIW?

But the majority is generally what decides things

[quote author=Zakath link=topic=14549.msg148987#msg148987 date=1143146485]
FWIW, using the fact that more people support your point of view than do his to try and make your argument is a logical fallacy. The majority opinion is not a logical fact.
[/quote]

However, whether it is a useful point to make depends on the nature of the argument.  His position is that the community would be better off without the crosses on the flag.  It is the majority opinion of the people living in the given community that it doesn't matter.  Of course, one needs to find a way to
communicate this without sounding condescending.


re: Crazed
That is irrelevant.  If the majority of people in a given group are colour blind
and say "red = green," does that make it so?

[quote author=Rule link=topic=14549.msg148995#msg148995 date=1143150221]
[quote author=Zakath link=topic=14549.msg148987#msg148987 date=1143146485]
FWIW, using the fact that more people support your point of view than do his to try and make your argument is a logical fallacy. The majority opinion is not a logical fact.
[/quote]

However, whether it is a useful point to make depends on the nature of the argument.  His position is that the community would be better off without the crosses on the flag.  It is the majority opinion of the people living in the given community that it doesn't matter.  Of course, one needs to find a way to
communicate this without sounding condescending.


re: Crazed
That is irrelevant.  If the majority of people in a given group are colour blind
and say "red = green," does that make it so?



[/quote]We're not deciding whether something is red vs. green (or blue HAHA, I hope someone gets that)...we're talkin about an emblem.  Most people want the emblem, the minority of people don't want the emblem...in Congress when most people want something they generally get it.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=14549.msg148997#msg148997 date=1143150552]
[quote author=Rule link=topic=14549.msg148995#msg148995 date=1143150221]
[quote author=Zakath link=topic=14549.msg148987#msg148987 date=1143146485]
FWIW, using the fact that more people support your point of view than do his to try and make your argument is a logical fallacy. The majority opinion is not a logical fact.
[/quote]

However, whether it is a useful point to make depends on the nature of the argument.  His position is that the community would be better off without the crosses on the flag.  It is the majority opinion of the people living in the given community that it doesn't matter.  Of course, one needs to find a way to
communicate this without sounding condescending.


re: Crazed
That is irrelevant.  If the majority of people in a given group are colour blind
and say "red = green," does that make it so?



[/quote]We're not deciding whether something is red vs. green (or blue HAHA, I hope someone gets that)...we're talkin about an emblem.  Most people want the emblem, the minority of people don't want the emblem...in Congress when most people want something they generally get it.
[/quote]

Regardless of "what usually happens in congress," your point that "majority rules" will not be well taken, especially by any sort of intellectual.  If you want to convince me that something of a factual nature is either true or untrue, you will have to do more than claim that most people believe it is (untrue).  The burden on you is to prove me wrong, using logic.  However, I did note
how a "majority rules" argument could be effectively used in a particular situation -- if the dispute in question revolves around majority opinion.

I'm way confused, I'm not proving any facts, just saying that most people in Las Cruces want the emblem to stay as-is.

That's fine, as far as it goes. I'm just warning you against trying to make that argument more than it is.

Saying "Most people want the emblem kept the way it is" would be fine. Saying "Most people want the emblem kept the way it is, so you're wrong and you should shut up and go away" would not be.