Front-page picture of kiss was a moral insult (and counterproductive).
Page 1 photo of kiss was offensive, disrespectful
Once again the Star Tribune delivers a stick in the eye to conservative Christians. On Sunday morning, a day of importance to believing Christians, the picture on the front page, above the fold, was of two men kissing (“State confronts profound change from gay marriage,” March 2). That is repugnant to me and to other people who believe that homosexual activity is morally wrong. Do you care if we are offended? Apparently not. Somehow, our beliefs must be disrespected, especially on a Sunday morning.
Kathleen Schoenfelder, Winsted, Minn.
• • •
That picture does little to advance the LGTB cause. I am accepting of alternative lifestyles and in favor of equal rights, but this “in your face” photo only leads to greater polarization. Biologically and culturally, this behavior is abnormal. And, despite your best intentions, it will probably remain so.
Charlie Corcoran, Stillwater
• • •
Thank you, Star Tribune, for the story describing the ways in which the expansion of marriage rights to all citizens has improved the lives of so many Minnesotans. I was delighted when the front page of the Sunday paper on my doorstep depicted the Bienieks exchanging a kiss, but I have no doubt others were less than pleased.
To those who object to tales of happy neighbors and pictures of committed couples in love, I beg your forgiveness, but I cannot offer you comfort. For years, you have had your way, and you held the happiness of others at bay to serve your own view of the world. If you have the courage to embrace this change, you can share in the joy of others. If you refuse to do so, then you choose your own unhappiness over the happiness of others. I don’t know why anyone would choose unhappiness over happiness, but the choice is yours, just as more of our neighbors now have the freedom to choose their happiness.
Robert Alberti, Minneapolis
Don’t be so quick to take offense
I take great exception to comments made in a March 1 letter about a photo that included the confederate flag (“Shame on Star Tribune for letting it in print”). How simple-minded some people are. Since when should a newspaper suppress or alter pictures relating to a story?
I, for one, was not offended by the image of the Confederate flag in the photograph of the Reilly brothers — mainly because I was concentrating on the “real” story. What people do or display in the privacy of their homes is their business. The story of the three brothers playing hockey at the University of Minnesota was the main topic, and a good one. If the picture captured an image not significant to the story, so be it.
Tom O’Connell, Plymouth
• • •
When viewing the photo referenced in a March 1 letter, I too noted the Confederate flag, which was but one of several mounted on the walls of the Reilly family’s basement. Whether by chance or by design, most of the flag was shielded by one of the young men in the picture; most people would not notice or recognize it. I knew that negative reaction would be forthcoming from readers without much to do.
It is a pity that the only association many folks in the North can link to that flag is racism and slavery. I would remind them that only a small percentage of Southerners were slave owners. Remember where the battles were fought. The Confederate flag to the majority of Southerners is a symbol of their heritage and the tens of thousands who fell in defense of their families, home and land. I do not know the family associated with the article, but I would first assume that they have cherished ties to the South in their heritage, as do I.
Richard H. Cole, Crystal
Sometimes, growth is just a source of trouble
The Star Tribune Editorial Board’s enthusiasm for development at Lyndale and Franklin Avenues in Minneapolis (“Minneapolis signals no-growth mind-set,” March 3) sounds reasonable, but have members of the board ever driven that route? It is in gridlock a good portion of the day; I avoid it whenever possible (except for my weekly shopping at the Wedge). It is for that reason I was happy when plans for a Trader Joe’s in the area fell through a few years back. What will increased development do for an already bad situation?
George Muellner, Plymouth
• • •
The surprisingly amateurish sarcastic tone of the editorial was ill-suited for a newspaper in a city competing with Denver and Seattle. Valuing “college-town nostalgia” is just as important as valuing “redevelopment potential.” The Star Tribune Editorial Board got its new stadium. The newspaper gets to sell its land and historic building for a zillion dollars. The Editorial Board goes on to support the feeding frenzy of big developers in Dinkytown. If slowing down, taking a breath and taking a moment to consider the “college-town nostalgic” value of a small parcel of land in Dinkytown is disastrous enough to destroy the dream of Minneapolis’ growth, then the dream is built on a pretty flimsy foundation.
Robert Borchert, Minneapolis
Look outside. It’s not about the taxes.
A March 3 letter writer attributes retirees’ leaving our state to estate taxes. Really?
Let’s have a more sensible perspective. Could our harsh climate be a factor?
A woman over 65 is twice as likely to die within a year if she suffers a hip fracture. What causes hip fractures? Falls. What causes many falls? Ice.
Shoveling snow is an activity that contributes to heart attacks in our elderly population.
Arthritis pain is exacerbated by cold.
Our lovely state offers many benefits for the young and hardy. Unfortunately, as age increases, many Minnesotans become virtual prisoners in their homes during the long winter months. I suspect this is the primary motivating factor in retiree flight.
Patricia Taylor, Minneapolis
The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.