Alan Skorski’s Letter (Jan. 8) illustrates the problems with the current nature of political discourse in this country.
While one may legitimately disagree with Rabbi Menachem Genack’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton (Opinion, Jan. 1), he has no reason to be “ashamed of himself,” as Mr. Skorski contends. Rather than attack Rabbi Genack personally for holding an opinion with which he disagrees, Mr. Skorski should have attempted to address the reasons the rabbi gave for his endorsement. Mr. Skorski’s letter would have been more meaningful if, instead of attacking the character and good faith of Rabbi Genack, he had focused instead on the substance of his disagreements with the rabbi’s position.
Our political discourse in this country would be elevated if those engaged in the debate realized that you can disagree without being disagreeable.