To the editor:

Naturally, I’ve been curious what people meant when they said they voted on “moral issues” when they chose to re-elect President Bush, because I thought I had used “moral issues” to make my choice for another candidate.

Thanks to Mr. Wentz’ “Voting morals” (Public Forum, Nov. 9), I have a better understanding of the moral issues important to him: abortion and gay marriage. However, I find making one’s choice on just two “moral issues” incredibly narrow.

Other moral issues come immediately to my mind. Is it moral to mislead the whole country in order to start a war? Is it moral that tens of millions of our citizens do not have health insurance? Is it moral to attack our environment? How moral is it to pass an ever-increasing deficit on to our children — and to their children?

Is it moral to give big tax breaks to businesses and wealthier individuals while cutting services to the poor, the homeless, the hungry, the mentally ill? I agree that abortion and gay marriage are moral issues worthy of consideration, but my moral compass steers me to the side opposite Mr. Wentz.

Wouldn’t it be a good idea to make our choices based on our moral principles as they apply to a wide range of issues and hope that we come down on God’s side?

Dick Wedel,

Lawrence