Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Old buildings tell the stories of the people who built and used them. In the case of the threatened 1852 Justus Ramsey House those stories are more important to St. Paul today than ever ("1852 cottage is part of Black history in St. Paul," Oct. 28). Actually, they're important to all of us.

I'm chair of Duluth's Historic Preservation Commission. Like St. Paul, our city has a wealth of historic buildings, and we, too, wrestle with preserving them. It's truly unfortunate that we can't save them all. But the Justus Ramsey House is one that must be preserved. Now that research shows the cottage has a decadeslong link to St. Paul's Black history, its story becomes much larger than the diminutive structure.

For 40 years the building was home to railroad porters, Black women entrepreneurs and domestic servants. Almost every early Pullman porter was a freed slave. The Civil War ended just as George Pullman was launching his new, more civilized concept in train travel. While getting paid for work was a welcome change, the porters were more of indentured servants to the company. That's why the first Black organized, but secret, union in America was the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters.

Duluth has had victories and defeats in preserving its past. When the Interstate 35 freeway threatened the Endion Depot Train Station (built in 1899), it was moved out of the way to Canal Park and reused. But Branch's Hall, the city's first brick building (from 1872), was lost.

Old buildings are treasures that preserve their stories. Sadly, most fade and are lost once the building is gone. Please save the Justus Ramsey house.

The writer is executive director of the Lake Superior Railroad Museum.

As a 62-year-old female, I was just gently harassed with pro-life literature on the way to my eye exam, which shares a building with a women's clinic. As a lifelong practicing Catholic, my faith is very important to me, and my heart goes out to these well-meaning yet misguided protesters. I know many of them would love to help the poor and vulnerable as our faith calls us to (better done with the Democrats), but they feel compelled to vote Republican to save those unborn babies. I love unborn babies as much as the next person, but my question for these people is: "In what world do we want to force women into giving birth?" It seems our world is turning in that direction, but do we have the right to force our religious beliefs about life beginning at conception onto all of humanity? The way I think about it is that while a separate human, the child is still the woman's life while in her body, and if she for whatever reason needs to end the life growing inside of herself, that is her own very sad decision. I use the term "misguided" above because I believe the energy and time spent to harass women going into a clinic could be more helpful to unborn children if people used it to help make a better world that supports them after they are born.

Sandra Boes O'Brien, Minneapolis

•••

A writer in the Oct. 28 Star Tribune claimed a fetus is not part of a woman's body ("Not your body, not your choice"). He stated: "We all know that every cell in a person's body has exactly the same DNA," and since fetal DNA is different from the woman's, it is not part of her body. His argument is based on a false premise, and his biologic conclusion about abortion is also false. There are numerous examples of genetic mosaicism, and the fact is that not every single cell in anyone has exactly the same DNA. There may be valid arguments against abortion, but his argument is not.

Jim Haemmerle, Savage

The writer is a retired physician.

•••

Words are important. In the Oct. 28 paper, eight doctors say they "know unequivocally that access to abortion is health care." Other folks, like me, say they know unequivocally that a human being is developing in the womb. What if, as a compromise, we all agree to permit abortion for the situations the doctors mention: cases of rape and incest, patients with diseases that need medications that can't be taken in pregnancy, pregnancies that risk like-threatening hemorrhage and lethal conditions of the fetus? For the other 90% (95%?) of pregnancies, would these doctors provide health care for the human life that is developing? Would they protect it? Would they even call it a human life, dependent on the mother, but still a human life of its own?

Ray Dick, Bloomington

Contrary to the position taken in the lead letter to the editor on Oct. 28 ("Abortion isn't at issue. Vote GOP"), nothing in the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, which took away the constitutional right to abortion from all women, would bar the federal government banning abortion nationwide. Indeed, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has proposed legislation that would do exactly that. My guess is that if Republicans take control of both houses of Congress, they will pass a bill banning abortion in some form. If Republicans gain veto-proof majorities, that legislation will become law.

After recently seeing what Republican appointees to the court repeatedly described as a well-settled precedent overturned at the first opportunity, I am not comforted by Republican assurances now that a similar precedent in Minnesota settled the matter to the point of mootness. Let there be no doubt, abortion is a central issue in our politics both in the state and nationally, and those who are trying to convince us otherwise are engaged in a bold act of deception.

Jon F. Miners, Crystal

The Star Tribune editorial on Nov. 3, "Health plan bargains abound again in 2023," makes me think of "Alice in Wonderland." Let me back up just a little. It is good we have the Affordable Care Act and MNsure to help make health insurance less unaffordable. However, is it reasonable to call something a bargain that is as overpriced and dysfunctional as U.S. health insurance? The facts show U.S. health care has placed the U.S. 46th for longevity in the world. On average a U.S. citizen lives six years less than one living in the No. 1 nation. At the same time, health care in the U.S. is approximately twice as expensive as better care in other modern nations. Good health insurance should cover all significant medical problems and prevent financial ruin. In the U.S., insurance companies are allowed to sell policies that lead to health care debt being the biggest cause of personal bankruptcy. Good health insurance should allow one to get care from the doctor and hospital of your choice. Instead most U.S. health insurance policies restrict which doctor and hospital one can use.

The editorial would be more accurately titled: "MNsure offers help finding less expensive, often inadequate insurance in a dysfunctional, overpriced market."

The writer is a physician.

There is so much angst and hand-wringing about the status of social media ("State's Twitter users wary of changes," Nov. 1). There are a couple of options that don't seem to be discussed. The first is to uninstall the app from your phone and computer. The other is to boycott the usage of these apps for a period of time (day, week, month). Social media is making lots of money from advertising based on user clicks. Not making as much money might be effective in getting their attention to make some changes for the better.

Gary Seim, Minneapolis

•••

Quitting Twitter might seem difficult at first because you have been conditioned to express any thought you might have at any particular moment to anyone who will listen. In its place, just write a letter to the editor.