Letters to the editor, Dec. 4, 2007

As observed from the responses and attitudes toward Archbishop John Nienstedt and the Catholic Church's teachings on homosexuality, the archbishop will never "win" by the world's standards, even when speaking out of compassion. It is clear, however, that he is not seeking our approval.

There are some things (namely, the truth) that cannot be changed, no matter how much dialogue ensues. To satisfy his critics, Nienstedt would need to refute church teaching, which is the teaching of Christ himself. His Nov. 30 letter to the Star Tribune, which stated, "As a priest and bishop, I have the responsibility before God and in the name of Jesus Christ to call all men and women to conversion ...," shows us what much of the world does not understand: Catholic or non-Catholic, our accountability is not to those who critique us or despise what we stand for. Our accountability is to God, and in the end we will be judged by him accordingly, not by the Nick Colemans of the world.

JULIE HOGAN, NEW BRIGHTON

What compassion? It would be much easier to have patience with the Catholic Church's official stance on homosexuality if one were to see evidence of its caring and acceptance.

We know that about 10 percent of our children are not heterosexual. Where is the church when it's time to teach them how to handle the challenges of that compassionate "call to celibacy"? If adult seminarians, who choose celibacy, are supported in that difficult decision, why doesn't the church provide support for our children who enter puberty and find out they're not heterosexual?

It's pretty hard to believe in caring and acceptance when the real message is "Don't tell! Hide or leave!" Quoting St. Paul is easy; taking real action to help real human beings is much tougher.

Furthermore, it's time to stop saying "lifestyle." If we mean "promiscuity," let's say that. I think we could achieve general agreement that promiscuity harms people. Sincere, adult, committed relationships strengthen people, regardless of the sexual identities God gave them.

I must set the record straight regarding Homicide Commander Amelia Huffman's handling of the Mark Loesch homicide.

The reality is that any decision between a rock and a hard place comes to the chief's desk. I take full responsibility regarding the decision to acknowledge the account of one of the accused and charged suspects. We knew that the media would get the full confession eventually, and we knew they would print it. Why? Because it is newsworthy. If the confession did not come in court proceedings, it would have been leaked to the media or become public information with the closure of the case.

It is very hard for the police department to defend itself from attacks by those not happy with our decisions on this case because the homicide is still an open case. The most recent charging on the case was just two days ago. Commenting on the quality or quantity of evidence in any open case is extremely unprofessional and against department policies.

I definitely understand and sympathize with the emotions surrounding this case and any homicide. We work hard to try and balance what we have to do to solve and prosecute a case and respect the wishes of victims' families. Obviously, those two goals don't always coincide. Lt. Huffman has my full trust and support in her handling of the Minneapolis Homicide Unit.

TIM DOLAN, MINNEAPOLIS;

Minnesota apparently is now facing a deficit and once again, the liberal Larry Pogemiller and Margaret Anderson Kelliher just don't get it ("State's projected deficit starts a hot debate over the next step," Dec. 1). They propose passing a bonding bill that would hire 10,000 Minnesotans to work on "projects" across the state.

Here's a simple analogy: If a family cannot afford to have another child, they should not procreate. Simply put, a bonding bill is another form of tax that Minnesotans should not be saddled with, thus the state cannot afford to put another 10,000 people on its payroll.

RICHARD O'BRIEN, ALBERTVILLE

Perhaps Dick Day needs to be reminded that his Republican Party has had nearly eight years to solve the "immigration problem" ("Illegal immigration emerges as key issue in First District race," Nov. 29). And it has messed it up thoroughly.

I doubt that Rep. Tim Walz could fix everything in the short time he's had to work on it. And I hardly think taking three days traveling with the vigilantes who are patrolling the U.S.-Mexican border is the way to address the issue , either.

The Bush administration intends to slash counterterrorism funding by more than half next year. This proposal also includes eliminating all funding for port security and transit security (Star Tribune, Dec. 1). Somehow all of this just doesn't make me feel safer.

DON MATTSON, MOORHEAD, MINN.

Heather Martens misses the point in her commentary on gun laws and public safety ("Nothing less than public safety is at stake in gun-law case," Nov. 30). All of the freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights -- freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to assemble, protection against unreasonable searches or seizure, limit the power of the government -- to some extent "deny democratically elected officials the ability to protect public safety." The government would be much more efficient if our civil liberties did not constrain them. But we are all better off with a government that is less efficient because of our personal rights. That is not short-circuiting democracy altogether, it is protecting it. It's in the Constitution.