Just for clarification, no book has ever outsold the Bible, not even Harry Potter. The unnecessary “surprise” from J.K. Rowling that she felt was necessary to have one of her beloved characters in her children’s book be gay was irresponsible at least and calculated at worst.

If we were to talk literary masterpieces Harry Potter does not match up to other great books or series. Ms. Rowling will probably never win author of the century. They are nice books, but not masterpieces. They have gotten a lot of kids reading, but maybe reading for the sake of reading is not good enough. Maybe something should be worth reading and, with all the murder, torture, blood letting and witchcraft that occur in the books, it might be better classified as an adult book. Mr. Exum might be better served reading them before embracing them or the characters Ms. Rowling is now changing.

In publishing history, children have read the Bible more than ever touched a Harry Potter book, with almost nine billion sold over the years to adults and children alike. As far as positive moral themes go as well as literary skill, any of the books by J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis far outpace Rowling’s books. Tolkien was even declared the author of the 20th Century. Now that is a literary honor well deserved. Both of these authors are about good versus evil with good winning. The characters also do not resort to becoming like the evil characters or sharing characteristics.

Now J.K. Rowling is indoctrinating children that somehow being gay is absolutely necessary to the story. But not while the stories are being written and published but right afterwards she makes this announcement, therefore avoiding the lag in sales that could have ensued.

So why and why now? Is it important that we know Dumbledore’s lifestyle choice? I don’t think so. It seems to be a calculated choice to include this adult issue into the innocent lives of children. Children are not emotionally to the point where they can understand that adults sometime make choices in their lives that are morally questionable. All the kids know is that they love the character and now cannot separate that character from this information. Therefore, the only reason would be to cause children to accept the gay lifestyle.

And why? It is not important to the story at all. There is no reason to discuss this issue in the context of these stories. It was a waste and a real moral shame that she would taint the story with immoral adult issues.

Cliff Sarbel
sarbelcliff@yahoo.com

* * *

After reading Roy Exum's column, I must say I'm baffled by Cliff Sarbel's response: "Rowling Taints Story with Immoral Adult Issues." One can only conclude that homosexuality itself is immoral in Mr. Sarbel's world-view.

I agree with Mr. Sarbel's assertion that "...adults sometimes make choices in their lives that are morally questionable" (voting for Bush/Cheney comes to mind) but being gay is not an immoral choice. It's neither immoral nor a choice. No one chooses to be gay; they're born that way. They can only choose to acknowledge their homosexuality or hide it.

Ms. Rowling states that one of her goals in writing this marvelous series was to show that differences should be tolerated - that tolerance is a virtue.

Tolerance is not an immoral adult issue. Intolerance, as displayed by Mr. Sarbel, is. He should have learned that as a child. Perhaps he would have, had Harry Potter been around then.

Dennis Berry
Astoria, Ore.
deberry10@mac.com

* * *

Why does there have to be ANY sexuality, hetero or homo, associated with Harry Potter? I'm working my way through the books and thoroughly enjoying them because there is nothing sexual or "dirty" about them.

When I read about Rowling adding the homosexual twist to it, it kind of ruined it for me. They are books for children - adult issues should have nothing to do with them. Homosexuals or heterosexuals that think that ANY sexuality associated with a childrens' book is OK, are sick.

R. Connor
Signal Mountain

* * *

What's all the fuss about a Harry Potter character being gay? Gays are people too, and if it is just a fictional character, then so be it.

I have a lot of gay and transgendered friends. They are some of my closest friends and confidantes. Everyone wants to "live in the past". It is time for people to move forward on this subject.

Darlene Rochelle
North Chattanooga

* * *

Once again I will probably catch flack for this, but I have to stand up for the Bible and for what God says in His book.

Dennis Berry wrote in his opinion letter that people do not choose to be gay - they are born that way.

When was the last time Mr Berry opened a Bible?

I am really sick of people pushing homosexuality saying it is OK. Yes, God loves everybody. But God hates sin....any sin. Not just this one or that one...a sin is a sin whether it is a lie, adultery or taking God's name in vain or homosexuality. God hates sin.

Now, where do I get that homosexuality is a sin? Read the first chapter of Romans. I am not going to get into a contest with someone here on the opinion, but if anyone wanted to ask questions about what the Bible teaches, ask a preacher. If you need the name of a local one in Chattanooga, email me and I will give you one.

C. Parris
Honolulu
parrisl002@hawaii.rr.com

* * *

It seems to me that when people write letters voicing their opinions about homosexuality and how they feel it is wrong, they are contradicting themselves. Isn't it wrong to judge people? Doesn't the Bible say it's wrong? Yet, when it comes to homosexuality, people who define themselves as "Christians" (I am speaking generally here, and certainly do not mean all people of Christian faith) feel the need to condemn others who might be different than them.

Why is it that homosexuality gets more flack from many religious conservatives than say, criminals or corrupt politicians (“W" comes to mind, though corrupt, unfortunately, is the norm in politics) or anyone else who might be hurting others. Gay people are not hurting anyone and they certainly don't choose that lifestyle. But, since they are born this way, shouldn't they be able to embrace who they are as individuals? Isn't that a lesson children need to be taught; to accept who they truly are and in turn, to accept others for who they are?

It is a lesson learned by Harry Potter as well as many other heroes in children's books. If you ask me, it's one of the most important lessons we can teach our kids. We can have a difference of opinion or a different lifestyle and still be able to peacefully coexist.

If people would take a minute to step back and look at what the Bible or the Torah, or many other religious texts are saying, it all comes down to intolerance and leading by example so that we can make our world a better place. It sounds like some people might need to go back and do some reading.

Charlie Moss
Highland Park
Chattanooga

* * *

Mr. Sarbel,

Thank you for your uninformed letter regarding Dumbledore's lifestyle, which by the way is none of your business. And the fact that he is a fictional character makes me wonder about your priorities.

Re-read the Bible. It is full of murder, torture, lewd behavior and magic. Remember wine to water, or my favorite, parting the Red Sea. Please, don't try to police the morality of the world until you know what you are talking about. And go see the movie Narnia. You might learn something about C. S. Lewis.

Johnny White

* * *

I think all of the controversy along with Rowling's assertion that she, "Always thought of Dumbledore as gay," is dispensable at best. This shouldn't ruin the book for anyone. Just because the author says this, doesn't mean it isn't still open to interpretation.

Isn't literature at its core an art form? People interpret sculpture and art fervently even though the artist has made his/or her point known. An observer can still feel the need to relate the work to their own life.

At the end of the movie, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Robert Redford and Paul Newman run out of a building, guns blazing into the spotlight of the Bolivian Calvary. The movie turns into a still frame and the rest is up to the audience. Did they live or die? The movie never makes that determination, so the audience is forced to say, "There's no way they lived," or "I hope they made it out. I think they did." If the writer of the movie, William Goldman came out and said, "They lived. I always thought they would." That shouldn't take away from those who believe otherwise. It's a performance, an art form with room for interpretation.

So why the big stir over this outing of Dumbledore. Rowling did not write it into the story, it's how she interpreted his character throughout. That, and we can't be sure that this was even the case. She could've been surrounded by marketing representatives brainstorming over ideas with questions like, "How do we keep this story fresh?" We simply do not know.

So, Rowling says Dumbledore is gay. That's it. That's all she did, was say it. I think if a reader would prefer Dumbledore be gay, then let him be gay. If not, then don't do it.

Matt Davis
Chattanooga

* * *

Let's remember something here...
The issue is never addressed in the books or (final) story. Therefore, an after-the-fact comment by Rowling, or anyone, is no more than opinion. And we all know what is said about those...everybody has one.

Well, I've got mine and in no way is Dumbledore gay.

Rowling can have her opinion, and it is no more than that...an opinion. After all, folks, these are not real people. They're merely characters in a fictitious story. Get real.

Bill Brookshire
Murfreesbor, Tn.