To the Editor:
Regarding Jonathan Capehart's syndicated column in the Sept. 22 print edition:
Does the South Jersey Times endorse Capehart's opinion in "Trump and Carson: Neither candidate is fit for the White House"?
Reading between the lines, Capehart seems to assert that Republican front-runners Donald Trump and Ben Carson are endorsing racism because they did not defend President Barack Obama against a radical's shout during a Trump campaign event that Obama is a Muslim
The writer could go back in history to the time when Catholics, Jews, Mormons, etc., were said to be unfit for the White House. The crux of the matter is that candidates or persons of those religions would not be expected to subjugate the U.S. Constitution to the tenets of Sharia Law.
Any candidate of any religion who runs for the presidency is questioned to affirm that he or she would uphold the Constitution and our system of laws. When Sharia Law advocates elevate women to the same level of men, maybe front-running candidates would endorse followers who prefer our Constitution over Sharia.
Obama has not been proven to be a Muslim as charged by the shouting radical. The president did, however, swear an oath to protect the Constitution – though some doubt his intentions. He repeatedly asserted that you can keep your insurance and doctor. Regarding "Obamacare, many people feel they were lied to when Obama stated that they could keep their existing insurance and their doctors. They no longer believe Obama.
Does the Times agree with Capehart's accusations of Republican bigotry?
Gerald Keer
Turnersville
Editor's note: Opinion columns, bylined "op-ed" articles and signed letters express the views of the writer, not the Times.[ Note; the above note claims they did not agree with the responding writer's opinion nor the 'bylined-article'. HMMM; who do they agree with?]
No comments:
Post a Comment