Dangerously, Destructively Wrong?

In his letter (Jan. 5) Thomas Oatway attacked The Signal’s editorial staff for its “shameful and potentially dangerous” editorial (Dec. 10) opposing Assembly Bill 2098, which prohibits physicians from disseminating medical “misinformation” regarding COVID-19 to their patients.

All I can say to Thomas Oatway is that there is more than meets the eye when it comes to this particular subject, and, as an L.A. city attorney who was coaching me in preparation for a deposition once told me, “There are usually five sides to every story — there’s the defense, there’s the prosecution, and then there are the three witnesses, each of whom saw something different.” We live in a world of “gray areas.” But regardless of the politics, the ever-present uncertainties, and the ever-evolving nature of our complete and absolute understanding of everything in life, Mr. Oatway prefers to see things as black and white, good and evil, us and them. And I can actually understand the reasoning behind this mode of thinking — it’s easier than considering the alternative, namely, that we don’t know everything. In this respect Mr. Oatway behaves much like the devoutly religious folks I frequently like to bash.

But more to Mr. Oatway’s stated position on COVID-19 — and all that came, and still comes, with it — may I suggest that he read an article that was published in the Oct. 31 edition of The Atlantic, a publication that caters to left-leaning people like him. In that article entitled “Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty” the author, Emily Oster, is asking the rest of “us” to forgive “them” for their overreaction to the pandemic.

Now why on Earth would a liberal leftist pen such a piece, and why would The Atlantic publish it? Is it because they are being bashed? Perhaps is it because they realize they were WRONG, as in dangerously and destructively wrong?

Arthur Saginian Santa Clarita