Readers Write (May 3): Minneapolis school board and protesters, vaccinations, state budget, the role of the left in freedom of speech

For its May 1 editorial "Backing protesters over Mpls. principals" (headlined online as "Minneapolis school board flunks governance 101"), I believe the Star Tribune Editorial Board gets a "C," for average. It is average to go with unexamined history and common thought, rather than to step back and see the deeper issues and the future we are facing. In this case, the unexamined history is of slavery, stolen indigenous lands and terrible inequity between white people and people of color in our city. To me, the school board's uncommon response to the protesters at its April 18 meeting was a breath of fresh air, one in which we publicly acknowledged this history in the form of reinstating school staff members of color who should never have been let go. It is past time for a strong program of affirmative action in Minneapolis Public Schools, whereby we give incentives, training and every form of support we can muster to get more staff of color. Please do your homework, and give us better reporting, on this crucial issue in our schools. As you say, "nearly 36,000 students and their families deserve better."

In response to "State can help boost immunization rates" (April 30): The Editorial Board's endorsement of forced vaccines by legislation made me tremble with fear and disgust. The fact that it could promote the idea that it is the government's place to dictate what we do with our bodies is outrageous and hypocritical.

For example, personal autonomy is usually extremely important to the Editorial Board, as is seen through its support for abortion rights and women's bodies. However, the editorialists are more than happy to tell us that we should ask no questions and have no objections with legislation that forces us to inject chemicals and known neurotoxins into our bloodstreams — and do it on their schedule.

Yes, vaccines save lives, and, yes, vaccines are critical to a healthy, disease-free society, but at the same time vaccines do contain chemicals, toxins and additives that we know are harmful to the body. Vaccines are not 100 percent safe every time or for every person (just check the national vaccine injury compensation program). Therefore, the government cannot force people to do something to themselves that can, albeit rarely, hurt them or their children.

While I am not personally anti-vaccination, I am vehemently opposed to the government forcing us to do anything with our bodies, ever, especially when there is risk of injury involved. It is a very slippery slope, and it is simply not government's place, no matter the "greater good." At the core, it is an infringement on our constitutional rights and our autonomy. Wanting to improve vaccination rates is not a bad thing; this is just not the way to do it. Please wake up and think about what a dangerous precedent this sets and where we draw the line about what substances can be injected into us and what the government can do to our bodies.

• • •

I realize anti-vaccine groups are targeting Somali families to turn them away from vaccination. I don't understand why they would put all those children in harm's way, but they have their beliefs and are entitled to them.

We learned the hard way that borrowing from the future is no way to run a government, and we are still catching up from the "no new taxes" era of former Gov. Tim Pawlenty. Taking money from the rainy-day fund is shortsighted, and history will not treat House Speaker Kurt Daudt kindly if he persists. As the Star Tribune Editorial Board says (May 1), it's time to make a reciprocal, compromising gesture to Gov. Mark Dayton. In this state, we take turns.

Nobody enjoys paying taxes, but we do it because we are in this lifeboat together. Taxes are a joint investment in our shared future, in infrastructure, education, etc. Those investments always reap dividends. Please don't try to use tax cuts and rainy-day fund raids to attract donations for your run for governor; you could be heading toward another last-minute failure, like last year's. Manufacturing a stare-down is not mature leadership, it's bullying; there is a better way. We want a bill that reflects the wishes of all our citizens, not just your voters, and we want it now.

• • •

My checkbook has a large balance right now.

I have a backlog of repairs to do on my house, some costing much more than my monthly salary. I haven't paid for my kids' college tuition. I haven't paid the extra rising costs for their public school education that the schools have had to cut. I don't have money set aside, and am not even sure how much money I need for my family's health care needs — this year or in future years. I am not allowed to go into debt.

If this doesn't sound logical with home finances, why is Minnesota calling this a "surplus" and doing it with our state government?

Steve Sack's April 30 cartoon sparked some soul-searching with me. On one hand, I can fully understand why many at the University of California, Berkeley wouldn't want a racist bottom feeder like Ann Coulter speaking at their university. On the other hand, however, Steve Sack is right. These violent protests at Berkeley, against right-wing speakers are making us, as progressives, look like "the bad guys." This is a gravely serious mistake.

I'd be more amused seeing a story about Coulter speaking at Berkeley to a nearly empty auditorium. If the auditorium is nearly full, we'd at least know that we still have a lot of educating to do. How can that be measured in a place where free speech is oppressed?

• • •

Poor John Kass of the Chicago Tribune ("How the left is silencing free speech," May 2). Like Rip Van Winkle emerging from his slumber, he appears aware of only current events and ignorant of recent history. "Conservatives did not shame people into silence." Really? Ask country music trio the Dixie Chicks, who were threatened, had their music banned from hundreds of radio stations and endured vandalism to their homes because they expressed views contrary to conservatives who supported a sitting president.

The left will ruin a career because your personal views are objectionable? Let's check in with NFL player Colin Kaepernick and ask how his freedom of speech was greeted by conservatives. Rabid hatred and threats of reprisals for any team that hired him have undoubtedly contributed to his current career status.

And heaven forbid a retailer would use the all-inclusive greeting of "happy holidays" next December ­— such "offensive speech" is sure to spawn a boycott!

Silencing free speech? No. It's the exact opposite. Liberals have found a voice. It's loud, it's strong, and it may be frightening to conservatives who are used to their opponents turning the other cheek.