Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
Abby Rime and Adam Duininck's love story published on Sunday was touching ("Red meets blue, a real love story"). It's unfortunate it has to be newsworthy. I, too, live in a household where we often cancel out each other's votes. Shortly after the 2016 election, a friend commented that I lived in "a house divided." Strangely enough, the two people who live in that house don't feel that way. Why is that? Because we are honestly interested in each other. That extends to our opinions on various matters — including politics — and why we hold them. We discuss things to understand each other's viewpoints better, not with an agenda to change each other's opinions. And to learn from each other.
I find nowadays most folks don't want to discuss anything. They want to either make sure I share their opinion or if not, to change mine. I treasure those few who want to sit down and talk. But to do that you have to have an honest interest in others.
People are incredibly complex. When you see someone wearing a cowboy hat, what does that tell you about them? It tells you they are wearing a cowboy hat. That's about it. In today's world of quick tweets and sound bites, we all want to assign a bunch of attributes to one thing we see or know about someone — instead of taking the time to honestly engage with them and find out who they are.
They're probably a whole lot more interesting than you think.
Lauren Hill, Stillwater
•••
Jennifer Brooks' beautifully written column "Red meets blue, a real love story" was one of the most refreshing stories reported in a long time.
The romance and marriage of the Duinincks proves that it is still possible for human decency to transcend and triumph over the partisan political divide.
May their wonderful rapport serve as an example for what should be possible across the entire range of social interaction.
Edward Lief, Minneapolis
REGRETS
Taking it one ghost at a time
Thanks for the fine Sept. 18 commentary by Deborah Malmo, "Making peace with our ghosts." She's right about insomnia — me abed in the dark with the continuous loop of my unbecoming errors. I like the idea of dancing with each and then opening my hand and letting that one go. I had to laugh at Malmo's truth about other dance partners waiting in line. Yes.
I hope she feels her mother's tap on her left shoulder soon. I've been fortunate enough to receive such a tap from my mom.
Eugénie de Rosier, St. Paul
•••
"Make the most of your regrets," Thoreau is said to have said, adding, "To regret deeply is to live afresh." Thank you, Deborah Malmo.
Nearing the end of my eight-decade-long sojourn on this earth, I remain haunted by the ghosts of regret. Having lived a high-wire life of achievement, those trophies now seem of little value. During this end-of-life stage, these accomplishments are of no consolation.
During this summer and fall, I have been confronting my failings as a spouse and parent. I am now reliving a quarter century of regrets, brought about by my character defects and the psychic and spiritual wounds that I never took the time to confront. The first and most difficult task is to forgive me.
Since early childhood, I have felt unworthy of self-forgiveness. It has been a painful journey. Good works never wash away the indelible stains upon my soul: At the end of life, I still see myself as "damaged goods." I can find all sorts of sociological, social-psychological reasons for my damaged self-image. Nevertheless, at my age, I can no longer use that easy cop-out.
"The regrets that truly inhabit us bear the images of our victims. Those whose suffering we didn't see — or chose not to acknowledge," wrote Malmo. "The people we betrayed, belittled or ignored. The ones we treated carelessly or callously. The lives we could not save. The loves we could not claim."
I cannot move forward with making amends to my wife and daughters without first confronting the phantoms of my unresolved regrets. For some of us, self-forgiveness is the ultimate dark night of the soul.
Monte Bute, Woodbury
ABORTION
Not a compromise bill at all
Two recent letter writers have erroneously argued that Sen. Lindsey Graham's abortion bill, which would impose federal criminal penalties for abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, would be a good compromise for a divisive issue. One went on to suggest that Democrats rejected this so as not to allow Republicans to take credit for a negotiated solution.
But the Graham bill is not a compromise.
Each state creates its own criminal code, defining crimes and their punishments. The federal government has its own criminal code. Graham's bill would create a criminal penalty for abortion (after 15 weeks) whereas at present there is no federal crime for abortion at all.
If it passed, a woman in a state which restricts abortion entirely would still face state criminal charges for an abortion in week 12 despite that not being a federal crime. Meanwhile, a Minnesota woman would newly be subject to federal criminal charges for an abortion in week 18 even though there would be no state charges.
The net effect of the bill's passage would be more criminalization of abortion: a 0% reduction in state charges, and a 100% increase in federal charges. This is not a compromise.
A true compromise — which many on both sides of the issue would still oppose, including myself — would guarantee that all women in the country, regardless of state law, retain the right to an abortion without criminal penalty during the first 15 weeks of pregnancy, but criminalizing it after that. Graham's bill does no such thing because it has no impact whatsoever on state laws.
Michael Friedman, Minneapolis
The writer is former Executive Director of the Legal Rights Center.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Change must start at the top
The Star Tribune Editorial Board recently called for reorganization of Minnesota's Department of Human Services, asking if it was "too big to succeed." ("Is DHS too big to succeed?" Sept. 18.)
That reminded me of the Dilbert comic strip where the pointy-haired boss went on a corporate retreat to reform the company's processes and improve performance. In the end, the managers just moved some boxes around on the organizational chart, because that's the only thing they knew how to do.
Structure changes nothing. Leadership does. Starting at the top of the policy pyramid. Until the governor and Legislature are committed to setting well-defined outcome measures and holding state and county bureaucrats and community contractors accountable for meeting those metrics, nothing will ever change.
John Gunyou, Minnetonka
The writer was Minnesota finance commissioner in the Arne Carlson administration.
•••
Again, we're focusing on reform of the Department of Human Services. The Editorial Board touts breaking up the agency as if its size somehow figures in its inability year after year to check its handing out of multiple millions of taxpayer dollars to fake and fraudulent recipients. This will only allow the government to point to reshuffling to claim it tried to do something. When the next contractor comes along saying it will feed the hungry, the state should first ask why existing providers such as the St. Louis Park Emergency Program, all of the other food shelves, Sharing and Caring Hands, public schools, and the like shouldn't first be promoted.
No entity without any track record should receive any public money; certainly not many millions. Insist it first prove how it can apply private donations and then actually go out to sites to verify need and compliance. And somehow reward staff and management for denying applications to entities without adequate documentation of service. I'm afraid no amount of administrative restructuring will cure this problem.
Tom Olson, St. Louis Park
