LETTER: Yes, do blame Trump for the erosion of character in U.S.

To Ozaukee Press:

A recent letter to the editor published in Ozaukee Press, titled “Don’t blame the president for erosion of U.S. moral character,” invites public reconsideration of the president’s influence.

The author argued that President Trump bears no responsibility for the nation’s moral character. However, it is clear that a president’s actions and rhetoric significantly shape the ethical standards and public behavior of the country.

Moral character consists of the personal qualities and ethical traits that guide an individual’s actions and choices in matters of right and wrong. These attributes are especially important for leaders, whose decisions and conduct set the tone and serve as examples for society at large.

Trump’s 2005 Access Hollywood recording, in which he described “grabbing” women without consent, documents his boasting about sexual behavior. Additionally, the controversies surrounding Stormy Daniels and Trump’s role in provoking the Jan. 6 insurrection raise legitimate questions about the moral character he has demonstrated.

It is reasonable to ask whether the letter writer endorses these aspects of Trump’s moral example.

The letter’s claim of a growing acceptance of abortion is unfounded. Abortion is a medical decision undertaken under serious circumstances, and bans on the procedure have significant consequences for individual rights, medical progress, the economy and health care professionals in underserved regions. Trump has voiced “no regrets” regarding the Supreme Court’s actions that led to the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the elimination of the constitutional right to abortion—a fundamental health care right for women.

Assertions in the letter about increasing acceptance of euthanasia are also inaccurate. Active euthanasia remains illegal in all 50 states. However, a do-not-resuscitate order allows individuals to pass away peacefully, surrounded by loved ones, affording dignity at the end of life.

The World Food Program has warned that Trump’s and Elon Musk’s cuts to emergency food aid could result in a “death sentence for millions of people facing extreme hunger and starvation.” This highlights the moral implications of presidential decisions on a global scale.

The right to civil discourse, protest and the exchange of differing opinions is protected by the First Amendment, which remains a cornerstone of American democracy.

The letter’s author concluded, “Fairness would be to acknowledge that blame should be shared by many people, including ourselves.” This responsibility extends to those who voted for Trump. Many voters may feel remorse for their choices, even as they attend church and pray for forgiveness.

Ken Bretl

Fredonia