Readers Write (July 24): The Trump base, Delta's MSP-to-Tokyo service, bare arms on female broadcasters

Stephen B. Young's July 17 commentary states that those most likely to be Donald Trump fans are lower-skilled workers, small-business owners, Christians, lower-class white people and straight white males. Of those five categories, I fit only one: Christian. And before I go any farther, I'd better state my simple definition of "Christian": I believe that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died for my sins and rose again. He is my Lord and Savior. I think this is a definition many could agree with, at least as a starting point.

However, I am not a conservative Christian. For many years, I have been unhappy with the way so many people, in the media and elsewhere, lump all Christians into the conservative bucket. This year, with the Trump candidacy, I want to state as loudly as I can that, yes, I am a Christian, and, no, I will never vote for Donald Trump. I can't understand what conservative Christians see in Trump, who certainly doesn't exemplify the ideal Christian man. But that is their decision to make. My decision, as a Christian, is to give my support elsewhere.

• • •

Young implies that Christians are all marginalized by the stances of Hillary Clinton. This is not true — there are millions of Christians nationwide and tens of thousands in Minnesota who do not feel marginalized by her stances. I am such a Christian and am confident that the majority of people in my congregation and many others believe that the messages of hospitality to the stranger, concerns about economic inequities, and measures to provide inclusion to others, including gays, lesbians, and transgender people, by Clinton and the Democratic Party are more reflective of the good news of Jesus Christ than those of Mr. Trump. It is unfortunate that Young feels that Trump's messages of inhospitality to the stranger, celebrations of economic inequality and contempt for the institution of marriage, evidenced by his actions and writings, are more appealing to Christians.

• • •

There are many statements I disagree with in Young's commentary, headlined "The realignment of the working class," but I feel his attacks on rationality and reason need to be addressed. I am deeply troubled that anyone would malign any group for prizing rationality and applying reason to make decisions about our economy and government. Unlike Young's implication that rationality is a core ideology that seems to be on the left (of what I am not sure), I am quite sure that reasoning and rationality are available to all who want to try it, and I encourage all to do so! Young's arguments certainly could have benefited from its use.

• • •

• • •

An ideology gap between owners and managers of wealth isn't what's polarizing America, as Young argues, but wealth concentration. Managers and shareholders of huge multinational conglomerates are on the same page about the need to grow profits, the only serious argument between them being that shareholders get less when CEOs get more.

As to the workers who still make up the majority of employees, their share of the wealth is irrelevant.

Young is correct that with wealth comes education and a more liberal perspective on social issues, but wealth also offers an elite person the luxury of espousing liberal views without acting on them.

Of course poor and uneducated white men resent those with whom they compete for scarce jobs. (Many of those other job-seekers don't look or talk like them. Trump must be right. It must be some sort of government conspiracy.) They haven't studied finance and tax law, or the history of Western imperialism.

To prevent that happening, we must shift our educational goals. We must educate everyone equally, put natural laws back in charge of our planet and learn how to live in small, self-sufficient communities.

Only a deliberate and carefully executed move in that direction, beginning with the abandonment of trade deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, will restore the moral underpinnings of human society.

The state of Minnesota and the Twin Cities community have long been unwavering supporters of Delta Air Lines. At no other time has that been more clear than when a new U.S.-Japanese aviation agreement put Delta's MSP direct flight to Japan at risk.

Earlier this year, we set out to work with the community to maintain direct service from Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport to Japan and secure one of the five new daytime slots at Tokyo-Haneda airport being made available to U.S. carriers for the first time. The business community and public officials responded in overwhelming numbers.

The leadership of this great state was stronger than ever. U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar led the charge to secure one of the new hotly contested slots. Gov. Mark Dayton, U.S. Sen. Al Franken, U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum and the entire Minnesota congressional delegation also worked tirelessly to elevate the importance of MSP's maintaining a direct route to Japan. Business leaders, customers and employees across the state voiced their support of Delta's efforts in the public docket.

Delta may have its headquarters in Atlanta, but Minnesota is an important part of us. This was my first stop when I became CEO, and I am truly humbled by your efforts to keep Delta flying direct to Japan, and further securing your position as one of Delta's most important markets.

Commenting on the July 17 commentary "Male broadcasters, let's see your solid(arity) biceps," about the bare arms of women reporters:

I find them distracting. Men wear jackets. Why not women? A jacket can enhance an outfit. A female broadcaster can shed it as soon as she's off-camera, and wear a necklace to make any fashion statement she thinks important to her persona.

If women think about it, a jacket may save them hours in the gym every week. They should try it. They might like it. I know I would.