•••
In recent comments, former President Donald Trump has demonized immigrants, praised insurrectionists and expressed his intention to become a dictator if re-elected. All of this, and more, he has done with the apparent blessing of Christians all across America. Trump has promised to be their "retribution" — to restore America to traditional values and punish those who stand in the way. While Trump's rhetoric is hypnotic, it is misguided and deceptive. His stated values are anything but Christian. He has cloaked his political ambition in religious jargon, righteous indignation and a warped sense of patriotism. Sadly, many Christians have been seduced.
It is time for the Christian church in America to wake up! Christians of all stripes should focus on Jesus' call to welcome the stranger and love one's neighbor. Pastors and priests should publicly condemn Trump's seductive rhetoric. Donald Trump is not the savior; he only pretends to be.
The Rev. Alan C. Bray, St. Peter, Minn.
The writer is a retired pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
COLORADO RULING
Respect the courts
The featured letter Dec. 22, responding to the Colorado ruling on Trump, asserts a constitutional right to vote for literally anyone (even a Nazi, I guess), and anyone who disagrees is a Nazi. This is more of a schoolyard chant than an argument, but I'm mostly troubled by the writer's disdain for the judicial process. A state Supreme Court carefully read the text of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and concluded that these facts — Donald Trump's attempt to remain in power despite numerous court rulings that he lost the election — fall within the language of that text. The court concluded that our constitutional right to vote is qualified: We do not have the option of voting for someone who has engaged in attempts to overthrow our government.
This is not a wildly partisan view of the law. Its most prominent advocates are two legal scholars who are members of the arch-conservative Federalist Society, who surprised even themselves when they researched the topic and came to what they felt was an inescapable conclusion. Members of another state Supreme Court — ours — determined that it was not appropriate to make this decision at the primary stage, when it's not clear that Trump will actually be the candidate. (So, no, the court didn't "get it right" if one thinks Trump should be permitted on the ballot — it just postponed the decision.)