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

•••

I recently had the privilege of attending the State of the State address, and there I witnessed Minnesota Republicans "saying the quiet part out loud," or more accurately, they stayed quiet when they shouldn't have. The self-styled party of Christian values and party of elected officials who routinely cite Scripture and claim to know the mind of God failed in the most basic test of Christian decency.

"Peter, do you love me?"

"You know I do."

"Feed my lambs."

It's not a metaphor. There is no more basic expression of Christian love and obligation than to feed the hungry, and the only miracle in all four Gospels is the feeding of the multitudes. When the disciples would let the people fend for themselves, Jesus rejects that. "You feed them." No cost-benefit analysis. No means test.

When Gov. Tim Walz celebrated the law to provide free lunch for all children in public schools, not a single Republican rose to applaud. A party of such loud streetcorner preachers ought to have done at least that, but no.

As a Christian, I understand why the GOP opposes reproductive health protection, transgender refuge legislation, and the ban on conversion "therapy" for minors and vulnerable adults, even if I wholeheartedly disagree with that opposition and joyfully celebrate those bills' passage. But feeding the hungry? Any further GOP claims to the spiritual high ground sound to my ears like a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

Chris McArdle, Anoka

The writer is a pastor.

•••

If I may briefly use this forum to address any conservatives who are bemoaning end times given the recent passage of state laws protecting abortion seekers and transgender people.

1) You probably know someone who has had an abortion. Or someone you know does. That person did not want to have an abortion, they felt they had to. It was agonizing. Leave them and any future thems alone.

2) You've been in the bathroom with a transgender person. It was fine. You probably didn't even notice, but if you're actually devoting the amount of time Republican politics seems to suggest to worrying about who is peeing in the next stall over, frankly I don't want to be in the bathroom with you any more than does the transgender person in that stall.

3) You didn't care about women's sports before your leaders told you to, and you don't truly care in the slightest about them now. And that's a shame.

I'm glad I could help. Please move along with your lives.

Adam Skoglund, Eden Prairie

•••

With regard to an April 26 letter against gender affirming health care for minors, if parents can consent in many states to their offspring's marriage at 16 or joining the military at 17, what makes them unqualified to give consent to their child's medical care in this important area until the age of 18? Especially if that same young person who was unqualified to know what they want, even with parental guidance at 17 years, 364 days, can now consent at 18 years, 0 days, to any and all treatments, many much more drastic than puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones that so many seem determined to deny access to for minors.

Puberty blockers are pretty benign. There is some lessening of bone mineralization, most of which is made up after the puberty blocker is stopped. If there is any doubt about the durability of the young person's desire to transition, puberty blockers can be an excellent temporizing measure that still preserves the option for the patient to ultimately go through puberty in the gender they identify with, whether their gender at birth or another chosen one. For trans men, that may mean no need for top surgery and a natural male Adam's apple and more masculine facial bone structure. For trans women, it is even more important, as going through male puberty does cause irreversible vocal changes that no amount of speech therapy can eliminate, as well as a need to live with the male Adam's apple and facial bone structure or undergo a series of plastic surgeries that could be avoided by going through female rather than male puberty.

No amount of mental health "treatment" can undo the very real message that who they are and have a right to choose to be (even the legislation proposers admit that such care will be accessible at age 18) is something "society" can arbitrarily withhold from them as if they are in some way unworthy or deviant. Blacks, Native Americans, gays and women have all had this type treatment and know it is wrong. Label it what it is: transphobia and a desire to control other's personal choices, not "science," and avoid it, as I am proud to say Minnesota has done so far.

Dr. Jennie Orr, Hastings

The writer is a retired family physician.

MARIJUANA

The logical conclusion

In an April 28 commentary, John Hagen writes that marijuana should remain illegal for several reasons, including the general health of the public. But if we look at the top causes of death in the U.S., we find that the biggest killers are heart disease, cancer, COVID, trauma and stroke. The obvious public health solution is to make illegal the following:

1) Tobacco.

2) Alcohol.

3) Failure to immunize.

4) French fries.

5) Guns.

6) Cars.

This is unlikely to work.

Dr. Paul Haller, Minneapolis

TEST SCORES

One missed point

Too many people want to rail about Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment scores as an indicator of failures in the education system ("Grad rates are only part of the exam," editorial, April 28). However, missing in the selected facts was the very important note that every time a student opts out of an MCA test, the state marks that as "Does Not Meet the Standard." With increasing numbers choosing that route, knowing the tests don't matter to their education, ask what the passing rates are with those numbers removed. They're still not what they could be, in part because of the group of students who take them but don't care, but let's not sound the horn of despair without all the facts presented.

Mark A. Domeier, Ellendale, Minn.

The writer is an English teacher.

TEACHER LICENSURE

Let's hear from a pro

Re: "Minnesota shouldn't settle for second-best teachers" (counterpoint, April 26):

I asked one of my best friends, a newly retired but highly experienced teacher (she even taught in a Native American reservation), to give her thoughts on this article:

"Teacher licensure is a bureaucratic nightmare pretty much everywhere, and my quick read of this article makes me think that it's kind of splitting hairs. They are objecting to an easier path between career levels, meaning that by the time a teacher got to this point, they already have a degree and some experience. In my opinion, complaining about this begs the larger question of actually dealing with why teaching has turned into such an untenable career that the teacher shortage is so dire. 44% of teachers leave after 5 years on the job — because to pay off student loans they need two jobs, but being a new teacher takes 60 hours a week, because administrators and parents treat them [terribly], because kids are allowed to physically and verbally abuse them without consequences AND then the teacher gets yelled at for complaining. So, yeah. That.

"I've been certified in Minnesota, New Mexico, and Arizona and it was both a pain … and seemingly unrelated to my actual qualifications all the way around. I loved teaching, and my students, but it is not for the faint of heart."

William Tajibnapis, Minneapolis