Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

Hillary Clinton's health will prevent her from being the Democrat nominee. Write it down.

To the Editor:

Re “‘I Can Watch It on TV’: Excuses for Republicans Skipping a Trump Convention” (news article, June 2):

Those Republicans who won’t attend the convention are running scared—not afraid of their chances of re-election but truly afraid of Donald Trump and what he will do, if elected, to eliminate their gravy trains and their lucrative connections.

These Republicans should all be ashamed of themselves for acting like 4-year-olds deprived of toys so they have a tantrum. The people have spoken, and they want real change in the country. As far as I can see, Donald Trump is the one who can actually effect that change.

Republicans should unite around the one person who may be able to win the presidency. Not supporting him will ruin the only chance the Republicans have to fix the country’s problems.

CAROL A. CASTELLI

Oyster Bay, N.Y.

Note from KBJ: Bingo. The elites are used to getting their way. This time, the people get their way.

The word "atheism" can mean either (1) nonbelief, i.e., absence of belief that God exists, or (2) disbelief, i.e., belief that God does not exist. (Michael Martin calls these "negative atheism" and "positive atheism," respectively.) Most of the people who go around broadcasting their atheism are of the second type. What I don't understand is the compulsion to broadcast one's belief that an object of a certain sort doesn't exist. There are many objects that I believe do not exist, such as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and Dodo birds. Do I go around telling everyone that I have these beliefs? The very idea is absurd. Life is too short to go around informing others (especially strangers) that one believes that objects of a certain sort do not exist.

So why do so many atheists do this? The only explanation I can come up with is that they're insecure. Deep down, they're worried that the being in whose existence they disbelieve actually exists. By broadcasting their belief in God's nonexistence, and inviting others to do the same, they feel more secure. (Solidarity? Strength in numbers?) This article about Christopher Hitchens is funny to me, because it shows how insecure many atheists are. They cannot tolerate the slightest deviation from atheistic dogma. God forbid that these people ever get political power. We know that theists can live peaceably together. We do not know whether atheists, empowered, can live and let live.

For the record, I'm an atheist in the first sense. I lack a belief in God. I also lack a belief in nonGod (so to speak). The world as we experience it is compatible both with and without God. Anyone who presumes to know that God does or doesn't exist is a fool.

Chicago IX: Chicago's Greatest Hits (1975). This song appeared originally on Chicago II (1970). I'm sorry to say that I didn't appreciate Chicago when it was releasing hit after hit in the 1970s. I now consider Chicago not merely a good band but a great band. I'm glad Katherine and I got to see Chicago in concert a couple of years ago. Better late than never. What's your favorite Chicago song?

Here.

Here.

To the Editor:

Re “Unusual Race Tests Playbook for Clinton Bid” (front page, May 29):

I would say this to Hillary Clinton: I know that you’ve been distracted by Bernie Sanders, but get a new playbook before Donald Trump’s campaign gains more traction. And start with a new slogan. The current one, “Breaking Down Barriers,” is mild and ordinary, though I get that it plays off Mr. Trump’s xenophobia.

Here in one word is a trenchant and compelling slogan: “Sanity.”

“Sanity” embraces all the qualities that you bring to the campaign and counters Mr. Trump’s boasting, blasting and bloviating.

DAVID SWANGER

Santa Cruz, Calif.

Note from KBJ: Good luck with that. Hillary Clinton is more likely to be imprisoned than inaugurated.

To the Editor:

Re “A Manifesto Extolling Free Speech” (Arts pages, May 23):

I do understand that to a great number of people both outside and inside academia, “safe spaces” appear to be yet another millennial-coddling ploy. There may be some truth to that, as if college weren’t enough like the womb in its relentless cosseting of students’ lives.

Yet since I’ve begun teaching at a public university with a vastly different population from my years as a student in private schools, I see safe spaces as all too necessary.

As a group, my students are quite vulnerable to all imaginable forms of discrimination, deprivation and violence; having been battered enough by the “real world” already, they deserve an island of relief with people they can come to trust.

If we had only ideas to worry about rather than realities of power and identity, then everyone could enjoy Timothy Garton Ash’s “robust civility.” Unfortunately, we’re not all there yet.

MARSHALL N. ARMINTOR

Denton, Tex.

The writer is a senior lecturer and graduate adviser in the English department at the University of North Texas.

Note from KBJ: I treat my students like adults, because they are adults. Eighteen-year-olds in the military can take a sophisticated firearm apart and put it back together in the dark (among many other things). If you treat an adult like a child, you get childish behavior in return. I'm disappointed, but not surprised, that the University of North Texas infantilizes its students.

Here.

Here.