Letter: Charles, Cyrus, Ashoka and the Thai king
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your leading article emphatically claims that 'Charles cannot be a defender of all faiths' (27 June) because that 'is constitutional and religious nonsense'. I am not so sure about legal, but religious nonsense it's not.
A perfect precedent would be the Persian-Zoroastrian King of Kings, Cyrus the Great. He ruled benignly and tolerantly, and his empire included a far greater variety of religions than in Britain today. He liberated many nations - Jews among them - from Babylonian captivity. The gods of all peoples under Cyrus's (and his heirs') rule were equally respected. He was anointed (and crowned) by the priests of all religions, according to their particular customs and rituals.
Yours faithfully,
GEORGE ZORI-ASTRO-REZONER
London, SW2
27 June
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments