Ben Carson

Dr. Benjamin Carson, the famed Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon , apologized Friday for his "choice of words" and use of examples in discussing gay marriage on Fox News earlier in the week. During Sean Hannity's show on Tuesday, when asked about the matter before the Supreme Court, Carson said, "Marriage is between a man and a woman. No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn't matter what they are. They don't get to change the definition.

I have to disagree with Diane Brown ("Only closed minds stifle opposing viewpoints, May 16) on both her key points about Ben Carson's remarks on marriage equality and the opposition to him giving the commencement speech at Johns Hopkins University this year. At best, Ben Carson's remarks showed a breathtaking lack of understanding, and at worst, bigotry. When opponents of gay marriage mention pedophilia and bestiality in the same sentence as homosexuality, they know exactly what they are doing: they are illegitimizing and belittling homosexual love as being as perverted and deviant as the other practices.

Here we go again. Two of The Sun's writers are now after Dr. Benjamin Carson because he spoke up about spanking and marriage. Spanking is "beating" or "abuse?" Not on my watch. I was spanked when I was a youngster, and I wasn't abused - I was reprimanded for my action which was poor judgment on my part. It was a hair brush that was used with two whacks. And you know what? I learned that it was up to me to think carefully about what I was about to do. And yeah, I really did know it was wrong.

As someone who came of age after the civil rights struggles of the 1960s, I was really struck and disturbed by some of the scenes in the Jackie Robinson movie, "42" ("'42' hits a homer at the box office," April 15). When you see the crowds in these scenes with their bigotry, anger, intolerance and narrow-mindedness, I am struck and confused, wondering if I am watching an African-American hero trying to integrate professional baseball in 1963, or watching an African-American hero, (Dr. Ben Carson or any other conservative speaker)

I have to disagree with Diane Brown ("Only closed minds stifle opposing viewpoints, May 16) on both her key points about Ben Carson's remarks on marriage equality and the opposition to him giving the commencement speech at Johns Hopkins University this year. At best, Ben Carson's remarks showed a breathtaking lack of understanding, and at worst, bigotry. When opponents of gay marriage mention pedophilia and bestiality in the same sentence as homosexuality, they know exactly what they are doing: they are illegitimizing and belittling homosexual love as being as perverted and deviant as the other practices.

As someone who came of age after the civil rights struggles of the 1960s, I was really struck and disturbed by some of the scenes in the Jackie Robinson movie, "42" ("'42' hits a homer at the box office," April 15). When you see the crowds in these scenes with their bigotry, anger, intolerance and narrow-mindedness, I am struck and confused, wondering if I am watching an African-American hero trying to integrate professional baseball in 1963, or watching an African-American hero, (Dr. Ben Carson or any other conservative speaker)

Alexander Hooke accuses the liberal media of being self-righteous and intolerant concerning their treatment of Dr. Ben Carson's comments on gay marriage ("Liberal Intolerance" April 9). As if one could logically argue the point to Dr. Carson that gay marriage does not equate with bestiality. Of course all is to be forgiven because Dr. Carson apologized simply for his poor choice of words in expressing his ideas. As if only he had spoken more eloquently, all would be understood. And we should just point out to Dr. Carson the error of his ways so that he might be convinced otherwise.

Neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson stepped down Wednesday as commencement speaker at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine after complaints from students about controversial comments concerning same-sex marriage. The withdrawal came less than a week after medical school Dean Paul B. Rothman chastised Carson for his comments and met with graduating students concerned that the famed physician was an inappropriate commencement speaker. Carson sent Rothman a letter saying that he didn't want to "distract from the celebratory nature of the day. " "Given all the national media surrounding my statements as to my belief in traditional marriage, I believe it would be in the best interest of the students for me to voluntarily withdraw as your commencement speaker this year," he wrote in the letter to Rothman, which the dean shared with the Hopkins community.

John Hopkins professor Jon Lorsch will replace neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson as commencement speaker at the institution's School of Medicine. Lorsch will become director of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences this summer. He has spent the last 12 years studying how cells make proteins, a process that can help look at why people get cancer. Carson voluntarily stepped down this month as commencement speaker for Hopkins School of Medicine and School of Education after making controversial comments about same-sex marriage.

Many thanks to the Baltimore Sun for an eloquent editorial on the Ben Carson saga ("Ben Carson and the price of free speech," April 13). This is a work of art! The Sun's staff has captured the essence of free speech with professorial precision. And, have accepted free speech that may be controversial, as long as it stays in context. We also got a lesson in what happens when our so-called free speech becomes aberrant, degrading, and outside the limits of good taste. This piece should also send an alert to those who are steadfast in their defense of Dr. Ben. Loyalty and preconception must be tempered with common sense and reality.

Letter writer Michael Baseman criticizes another reader who says that liberal media is intolerant ("We can't change Ben Carson's view," April 20). He goes on to suggest that a logical response to Dr. Carson's statements would be useless and implies that he would refuse to forgive someone who has publicly and humbly apologized. Finally, he suggests it would be a waste of time to state his opinion to someone who does not agree with him. Is this not itself the definition of intolerance?

John Hopkins professor Jon Lorsch will replace neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson as commencement speaker at the institution's School of Medicine. Lorsch will become director of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences this summer. He has spent the last 12 years studying how cells make proteins, a process that can help look at why people get cancer. Carson voluntarily stepped down this month as commencement speaker for Hopkins School of Medicine and School of Education after making controversial comments about same-sex marriage.

We are appalled at the KAL cartoon published in The Sun on Sunday, April 14. Dr. Ben Carson is a man to be admired, not criticized. He apologized to the gay community for his unfortunate remarks. We need more men like Dr. Carson in this world. He'd definitely have our votes, should he decide to run for any political office. Ronald and Vivian Fortner Text NEWS to 70701 to get Baltimore Sun local news text alerts

I support The Sun's position on Dr. Ben Carson ("The price of free speech," April 13). Dr. Carson was accorded his First Amendment right to freely express his views on marriage equality - and those outraged by the hurtful and insulting comments he made also have a right to express theirs. Not only that, Hopkins students have a right to a say in who addresses their commencement. What I find most disturbing about Dr. Carson's views is that they generally reflect right-wing Republican ideas.

It seems we have reached an odd kind of stage in the United States when the Supreme Court has ruled that campaign spending by corporate fatcats is permissible "free speech," but Dr. Ben Carson's utterances against gay marriage are considered impermissible bigotry by his employers. I would note that Dr. Carson did not advocate punishment, imprisonment or persecution for same-sex couples; he only questioned their right to marriage, an institution millions of straight Americans have foregone in favor of mere cohabitation.

Alexander Hooke accuses the liberal media of being self-righteous and intolerant concerning their treatment of Dr. Ben Carson's comments on gay marriage ("Liberal Intolerance" April 9). As if one could logically argue the point to Dr. Carson that gay marriage does not equate with bestiality. Of course all is to be forgiven because Dr. Carson apologized simply for his poor choice of words in expressing his ideas. As if only he had spoken more eloquently, all would be understood. And we should just point out to Dr. Carson the error of his ways so that he might be convinced otherwise.

I find it unbelievable that Dan Rodricks , in his Sunday column, thinks that the laws God gave us to live by are antiquated ("Ben Carson's conservative views are drawn from the Bible" Mar 30). The problems we face in this world today come from that same line of thinking. If we never turned our backs on God, we wouldn't live in a world on the edge of self destruction that exists today. All I can do is pray that the Lord opens Mr. Rodricks' eyes to the truth before He returns to take His church home.

Although Dr. Benjamin Carson's same-sex marriage remark was an unfortunate enthymeme, surely well-educated Hopkins students have the intellectual capacity to understand the unstated premise of his argument ("Hopkins chides Carson for gay-marriage remarks," April 6): Once you reduce the qualification for marriage to a single characteristic for the sake of inclusiveness, you can't object to the word being used for any situation that fits that characteristic. Polygamists, for example, argue that they too enter into loving, caring relationships.

To say that I was absolutely outraged when I saw the KAL's cartoon of April 14 is putting it more than mildly. To see Dr. Ben Carson falling flat on his face is showing such disrespect for a man who has spent half of his life using his surgical skills to heal and save the lives of so many children in this country. It is disgraceful to say the least. Apparently, this disrespect for the doctor is because he had the audacity to speak from the heart of his Christian values with regard to marriage.

The positions The Sun's writers have taken recently with regard to free expression have not fulfilled its higher calling to support these paramount values. First, the essential theme of the Sun's April 3 article about Towson University and the white student union ("Towson U. fights back against negative attention") was that the university needed to apologize for not interfering with the attempts of certain students to form a white student union. But the university should have been commended, not condemned, for taking a principled stand in allowing unpopular speech, weak-kneed though its support may have been.