Letters to the Editor | April 8, 2024

Our sun. The only one we claim to own (although I’ve never seen a deed). The sun is cool! But the eclipse? Nah. Ho-hum. On Monday, millions of people will be squeezing into a thin diagonal line from Texas to Maine. They’ll don their eclipse glasses, which will hopefully protect them from blindness. (Oh, to be an ophthalmologist this week.) Umbraphiles (eclipse aficionados) will aim their phones at the sky, hoping to capture that spectacular four-minute moment, that thrill of watching nighttime show up early.

Eclipse parties! School closings! Predictions of gridlock as people exit their cars in the middle of I-95 to look to the heavens. It’s nature’s TikTok moment: the spectacle, the rarity, the fact that the event is not drawn out past our diminishing attention spans. I imagine that if we could witness climate change compressed into four minutes, we would take it much more seriously.

I wish I could feel the wonder and fear knights and serfs must have felt during the Dark Ages (which certainly lasted longer than four minutes) when the moon swallowed the sun, and then, to everyone’s joy, regurgitated it. Because of science, we know the moon will continue in its predictable orbit and situate itself between the sun and the Earth, and for a few minutes, the sun will be a mere shadow of itself. Let us pray then for clear skies. The forecast, however, is partly cloudy. An eclipse obscured by clouds? The proverbial silent tree falling in the forest. Millions of people, staring not at gray skies, but at their phones: “Siri: Show me the eclipse. Please!”

Steve Kallish, Elkins Park

I praise Solomon Jones for his recent column on Donald Trump’s immunity claims and what they say about race, class, and crime. His piece is one of the most accurate and comprehensive portrayals of the former president’s case. I was attempting to further my understanding of the immunity claim that Trump presented and see why, despite his argument seeming completely absurd to any unbiased jury, he has been able to delay the case and have the courts listen to silly arguments.

As I sought to understand, I stumbled upon Jones’ column, which perfectly addressed my question and exposed how wealth and social status allow people like Trump to “bend justice to their will.” It enlightened me to a new perspective on the role wealth and connections play in our justice system. As an African American, I greatly appreciate Jones bringing up how the legal system has treated our people to a different standard, a flaw in the judiciary that has yet to be completely solved. Overall, I hope he keeps writing columns like this one. They have the power to capture and change society.

Benjamin Mashoko, Burlington, Mass.

In a recent letter to the editor, the author faults Donald Trump’s critics for not providing any evidence to support their negative views. That claim is followed by statements that the former president delivered “peace and prosperity” and met his “stated priorities” (yet offers no proof of those claims). The writer asks for specific examples of Trump’s judgment that led to negative outcomes for any Americans.

Here are a few: The bungled response to COVID-19, which included lying about the severity of the pandemic and promotion of quack remedies certainly cost an untold number of American lives. The riot on Jan. 6, 2021, negatively affected the same law enforcement officers Trump and his acolytes claim to support. Then there are the government documents Trump took from the White House, putting our nation’s security at risk. The letter writer also mentions that the state court cases against Trump are flimsy, conveniently ignoring the serious felony charges Trump faces in federal court. If Americans are frightened, it’s by the possibility that Trump won’t be held accountable for his crimes and that he will continue to be a danger to our country and the rule of law.

Ned Mackin, Doylestown

Donald Trump has made his feelings known on NATO, and they are usually financial in nature. He has indicated, on more than one occasion, that he would have the U.S. withdraw from the group unless other member states paid their fair share. I don’t think what he said was unreasonable. Some recent comments were different, though. If I understood what he was saying, Trump indicated that NATO was an issue for the Europeans, as we had the oceans protecting us. “We have an ocean in between some problems,” he said. “We have a nice big, beautiful ocean.” His comments were not dissimilar to what was said in the 1930s as the reason for us to stay out of World War II. The feeling was that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans would protect us from foreign aggression.

Of course, that sense of security and safety was destroyed in the early morning hours of Dec. 7, 1941, when the air and naval forces of imperial Japan — in a surprise attack and in approximately two hours — destroyed much of our Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor. What saved us from an even greater catastrophe was that our aircraft carriers were at sea. Fast-forward 80 years. Nuclear submarines, armed with missiles with nuclear warheads, prowl the oceans all over the world. Land-based ICBMs can reach our country in just a few minutes. Our oceans offer no defense against nuclear attack. A strong alliance, such as NATO, is extremely important for our security and for the security of our allies.

Paul Bunkin, Turnersville

At Philly Catholic schools in the ‘60s, we had little opportunity to play women’s sports. My bike and the Jerry Blavat dances were my exercise. Many young women didn’t play sports for cultural reasons, lack of encouragement, or fear of menstrual issues. But in 1996, the U.S. women’s national soccer team took Olympic gold; Michelle Akers and Briana Scurry were my “sheroes.” Last week, LSU’s Angel Reese and Iowa’s Caitlin Clark renewed their head-to-head matchup. My daughter became a high school cross-country and track star.

The difference over the intervening years? The 1972 enactment of Title IX (ensuring equal treatment of male and female students in educational settings, including sports), the 1976 founding of the National Women’s Health Network (creating the women’s health movement, which, among other things, helped us gain insurance coverage for family planning), and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 (assuring that women could make their own health decisions). The backlash against women’s control of their own health and women’s progress in sports, the military, politics, and life in general is very disheartening — a reminder that the fight for fairness and equity is far from over.

Pat Ford-Roegner, Glen Mills, pfrvalley@gmail.com

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.