In her opinion piece, “Consider the sources, then think critically,” Ayers grapples with questions that many of us “consumers” are willing and able to answer. I can assure her that it is through listening, reading, discussing — even critically thinking — that leads many of us to feel passionate about contentious issues.

I can’t help but sense that what really bothers Ayers is that someone who is pro-death penalty might somehow be duped into caring about a man’s execution.  It’s as though she believes there are correct ways and incorrect ways to become interested in and form opinions on a matter.

To Ayers:  please do not assume that “we” are unaware of the links between Amnesty International and cases such as Davis’. I do not join you in faulting Amnesty International for doing its damnedest to save a man’s life. I reject your implication that Amnesty does not similarly toil for the lives of others. I reject the notion of an “all or nothing” approach.  I resent the ease with which you seem to separate issues of race and the death penalty.

I am grateful for the countless people who devote their lives and careers to social justice and civil rights issues — they work tirelessly, wishing that our nation would pay more attention.  I am heartened when one man’s plight gives our nation an opportunity to reflect on issues including all of the above: the death penalty, the failures of our judicial system, racism, etc.  Please know that “we” are capable of understanding how these issues relate to one another. As one of the millions of Americans who was horrified at Davis’ execution, I am not concerned with what “motivated” similarly horrified people to take interest in this case. Rather, I am concerned that racism potentially led to an innocent man’s death.