In “Trump Was ‘Elephant in the Room’ at Civil Dinners” (Dec. 27), J. Peder Zane referred to President Trump’s status as the “Holden Caulfield of American politics.” For those readers who are unfamiliar with Holden Caulfield, he was the narrator portrayed in one of America’s most controversial books, “Catcher in the Rye.”
Most of the setting of J.D. Salinger’s novel takes place within New York City, Trump’s hometown; other than that commonality, the two narratives couldn’t have been more different. Caulfield was a character consumed with teenage angst and railed against what he viewed as the ugliness, crassness and phoniness of society.
Mark or stain?
Regarding the headline, “After chaotic start, GOP makes its mark in 2017” (Dec. 26), a slight nuance would to me make the text both much more accurate and appropriate;
I suggest, “after chaotic start, GOP leaves a stain on 2017.”
Separate church and state
Regarding “Alabama campaign goads some evangelicals into soul-searching” (Dec. 17): President Trump has done more to advance their agenda – rule against abortion and gay rights, channel government funds to private religious schools, calling for the elimination of the Johnson Amendment. Their agenda appears to call for a theocracy to govern America.
Separation of church and state is to be ignored where it serves them, except if you refuse to bake a cake for a couple based on religious beliefs. They want tax dollars to support their schools and political agenda. If they want to preach support of a specific politician, then they must give up their tax exemption. Why should other taxpayers subsidize their political campaigns?
The Founding Fathers made separation of church and state a fundamental tenet of our experiment with democracy. However, evangelicals pick and choose the parts of the Constitution that they support. Christ’s teachings challenge us to help the less fortunate, yet nowhere in the list of what Trump has done for the evangelicals is a mention of helping the less fortunate. Why?