Letters to the Editor | Jan. 25, 2023

As leaders in the Asian American and Pacific Islander community and the Jewish community in Pennsylvania, we are saddened and dismayed that the Lunar New Year celebration was undermined by a senseless tragedy in Monterey Park, Calif. Our hearts go out to our friends and allies in Southern California’s Asian community. We are exhausted from offering prayers and thoughts to victims of mass shootings. At a time when anti-Asian and anti-Jewish hate crimes have risen to alarming levels in Pennsylvania and across the nation, law enforcement and government leaders must redouble their efforts to understand the roots of hate crimes. All facets of society need to mobilize to mount an effective response. We pledge to work together — to help communities heal, and to feel safe and secure when celebrating their holidays. Hate is a pervasive disease. But we will not run. We will not cower in fear. We will not stop being proud of our identities. We invite all Pennsylvanians to do the same.

Stephanie Sun and Alan Hoffman, cochairs, Pennsylvania Asian Pacific American Jewish Alliance, and Marcia Bronstein, regional director, American Jewish Committee Philadelphia/Southern New Jersey

The Editorial Board’s warning to “arm against falsehoods” is not an idle admonition. In How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them, author Barbara F. Walter documents how misinformation and disinformation on social media can have devastating effects by fomenting ethnic and political divisions, even to the point of violence, as happened at the U.S. Capitol and elsewhere. She criticizes Fox News hosts Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity for being “only too happy to spread conspiracy theories and use hatred and division to increase their own ratings.” She reminds us of U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s claim that the “only way” to get freedom back is “with the price of blood.” And now, the perpetrator of the “Big Lie” himself is preparing to return to his Facebook and Twitter accounts so he can effectively conduct his 2024 presidential campaign. Communication media hold the potential for dramatically improving our quality of life. But unscrupulous actors can distort the media to wreak havoc and mayhem. If we don’t arm against deception, our democracy will surely perish.

John Groch, West Chester

The settlement between Boy Scouts of America and victims of child abuse was an important judgment to finally serve justice and recognize the legitimacy of the victims’ claims. However, the high cost of the settlement, forcing the sale of camps and probably curtailing other Boy Scout activities, threatens to “throw out the baby with the bathwater.” Current and future Boy Scouts benefit from nature camps. It would be a tragedy following a tragedy to deprive them of these important experiences.

Ina Asher, Merion

In a responsible Congress that works for the people and has the best interests of the country in mind, the first order of business for the Republican House speaker and his nominal majority would have been to increase the debt limit. Something which must be done, not to usher in new deficit spending, but to pay for outstanding financial obligations. Instead, this GOP House proudly made its first act a vote to rescind funding for the Internal Revenue Service, which was approved in the last Congress to modernize the agency’s 60-year-old technology, process a backlog of 10 million returns, respond to taxpayers who call with questions, and to sufficiently audit highincome individuals and corporations. Regarding the debt limit, many radical members of the GOP caucus are indicating a desire to engage in a dangerous game of chicken, threatening a default on our obligations unless the president and the Democrats agree to significant spending cuts. This is the definition of blackmail. We will soon see how resolute the Republicans remain as the prospect of default threatens millions of jobs, the stock market, and the global economy. Is this what voters want?

Oren Spiegler, Peters Township

As religious freedom continues to be a point of discussion in the United States, my heart is bleeding after learning about how my Ahmadi Muslim brothers in Burkina Faso were mercilessly murdered while praying in their mosque. Nine of my senior brothers were attacked by terrorists who demanded the older men renounce their faith. Once they refused, the terrorists shot and killed them one by one in front of the other worshippers, including children. The Quran states that “Whosoever killed a person — unless it be for killing a person or for creating disorder in the land — it shall be as if he had killed all mankind” [5:32]. I sincerely pray for my brothers in Burkina Faso and hope one day they will be able to have the same freedom of faith that I enjoy as a citizen in the United States.

Nameer Bhatti, member, Muslim Writers Guild of America, Blue Bell

In Sunday’s edition, writer Devi Lockwood makes her case for understanding people’s religious boundaries. She is not alone, as the courts and legislators are inept, seemingly unable to separate their faith from the law. We’ve seen how a baker can refuse service to a same-sex couple, a public official can refuse to marry a same-sex couple, a pharmacist can refuse to dispense medications based on their religious beliefs, and taxpayers in Maine must fund religious nonprofit schools. On abortion, lawmakers oppose the government paying for a routine medical procedure based on their deeply held religious beliefs. Some states seek to criminalize this common health-care procedure. Now we have the U.S. Supreme Court agreeing to hear the case of a Pennsylvania postal worker who refused to work on Sunday, asserting his religious freedom. It appears no one wants to answer the question: Where in the Constitution does it assert that one’s religious beliefs extend beyond their domicile and their place of worship?

Joel H. Beldner, Glenmoore

In New Mexico, failed MAGA Republican candidate Solomon Peña paid four men to shoot at Democratic lawmakers’ homes. The New Mexico Republican Party said, “If Peña is guilty, he must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.” In New York, George Santos conned his way into the U.S. House of Representatives, repeatedly fabricating his family, religion, education, and work history. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy insisted, “If there is something that rises to the occasion that [Santos] did something wrong, then we’ll deal with that at that time.” There is much to be said about the power of “if.” It is being used by Republicans as a way to give grace even to the lowest of Republican politicians. “If” offers an escape. “If” the conditions are right, we will act. Until then, as McCarthy also states, “You know, in America today, you’re innocent until proven guilty.” No “if” there. Would McCarthy and his fellow Republicans be as generous with their “ifs,” as generous with that grace, when it comes to Democrats? To Hunter Biden and his laptop and Hillary Clinton and her emails? “If” should be universal, for all people. To have that faith in one another, to be willing to give the benefit of the doubt, to truly believe someone is innocent until proven otherwise — that would allow us the space and the grace to bridge gaps and cross divides, to allow the benefits of communication and compromise. It would be a major step to create and maintain a political system that, instead of trying to sink opposition, rather seeks to raise all boats for the benefit of all people. That shouldn’t be “if.” It should be “when” and “now.”

Deborah DiMicco, Newtown

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 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.