CUPITMUSIC

Readers not buying this bridge

Re: “Gov. Polis’ pedestrian bridge has a long way to go,” July 13 editorial

The editorial laid out great reasons that this project should be scrapped:

1) The cost is unaffordable with today’s budget constraints.

2) The design failed to follow mandated design guidelines.

3) “Undulating waves like Colorado’s white-water rapids” – really? Have any of the designers actually been white water rafting? Hint, it’s called “white water” for a reason.

4) “From the steps of the Capitol looking west, visitors see a panoramic view that includes our iconic skyline, art museum, Central Library, Denver’s beautiful city hall and our majestic mountains” — yet they want to block the mountain view with a bridge to nowhere.

This is part of the problem with all the transplants (and I am referring to all the politicians) to Colorado — they don’t recognize what we have to offer with natural beauty.

Mark D Cutright, Englewood

This is a big, stupid waste of money that could be spent on important things like homelessness, hunger, fighting ICE raids, covering new Medicare gaps, etc.

Susan Hooyengaj, Denver

The editorial can best be described as wishy-washy.

We don’t see any redeeming aspects to the proposal. It will ruin an iconic vista for absolutely no reason. It won’t solve a problem but instead will likely create a few. It will cost a fortune, money that should be better spent elsewhere.

“Private donors and a visionary architect” cannot correct these issues. This project is an affront to the dignity of the historic area and is completely unnecessary. It should be abandoned before any more money is spent.

Judy and Larry Trompeter, Denver

Talking reason about unreasonable politicians

Re: “A guide for Colorado lawmakers to keep their feet out of their mouths,” July 13 commentary

Twice now, I have actually agreed with Krista Kafer. Her comments on the stupidity of George Teal, a Douglas County Commissioner, and state Rep. Ron Weinberg were right on the mark.

To be near my three granddaughters, I moved from north Denver to Douglas County. The good thing is I am eight minutes from my granddaughters. The bad news is I have to live in Douglas County. Parker and Castle Rock are not much better and Castle Rock might be worse. Don’t even get me started on Elizabeth.

As the Trump administration continues to chip away at the Constitution — through challenging birthright citizenship and passing his “Big Beautiful Bill,” which is going to affect the poorest, most vulnerable people in our country — I wonder where this is all going to end. The deporting of U.S. citizens and creating his own private army with the expansion of ICE at the taxpayers’ expense is egregious.

Maybe it is time for Krista Kafer to re-examine her political affiliation. I don’t expect her to become a Democrat. But I think she is slowly transforming into an independent. Ironically, according to a Gallup poll, those identifying as independent in this country comprise a larger number than those identifying as Republicans or Democrats. I only expect that disparity to continue to grow.

Welcome aboard, Krista. There is room for you with all the other independents. I think you might actually realize in today’s environment, this is not a bad place to be.

David Shaw, Highlands Ranch

Krista Kafer’s column last Sunday, while entirely appropriate in calling out George Teal and state Rep. Ron Weinberg, misses a larger truth. Donald Trump has elevated lying to new heights. Trump proves over and over again that it is OK to lie, then just deny you ever said it or double down by repeating it.

The fact that your lie was recorded? Not important to those legions of supporters not interested in facts. Teal and Weinberg are following this new model: the ‘art of the lie’. I doubt there will be repercussions for Teal and Weinberg, just as Trump’s lies are simply shrugged off by so many.

Paul Mauro, Aurora

Parents right to weigh in on gender education

Re: “U.S. Supreme Court got it right on parental rights and education,” July 6 commentary, and “Education opt-out: Rules for me, but not for thee?,” July 13 letters

It was shameful to see how the Jones family was disparaged first by employees of their school district and then by fellow Denver Post readers, all for opting their 6-year-old out of classroom lessons. In short, the Jones family said the teacher told the kids that gender is fluid and then instructed the 6-year-olds to choose their own genders. That’s a pretty heavy topic for young kids who don’t even have a full sense of what “gender” is yet.

It’s perfectly sensible for parents to decide that it’s inappropriate for the teacher to meddle so deeply into their child’s personal identity.

Suppose your child’s teacher, under the guise of creating a welcoming classroom, instructed the 6-year-olds to choose their own ethnicities. You may choose to opt out of this absurd lesson. The Joneses, and now the Supreme Court, would fully support your decision.

Dan Gryboski, Broomfield

Embracing the final days of a loved one

Re: “The humane choice: Assisted suicide was a blessing for brother,” July 13 letter to the editor

Referring to your letter writer’s comment on Krista Kafer’s column on assisted suicide (July 6), Kafer may or may not have “real-life experience” with end-of-life suffering, but I have. My mother was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor at age 80 and given 6 months to live. With her cognitive state rapidly declining, along with bodily control, her doctor, with her and my father’s consent, chose to refrain from treatment that would only temporarily extend her life, providing only palliative care.

Assisted suicide could have ended her life at that point. Instead, the family was able to spend her last weeks with her, even as she faded from consciousness. I will always cherish the week we had at the end, where we were able to sing and talk to her, even as she lay in a coma. She was not in pain. She lasted barely three months from her diagnosis, a time which allowed us all to grow into acceptance of her coming departure.

The problem with a law, no matter how carefully constructed, is that it creates expectations. Kafer made this point. Ironically, the law ultimately takes away the freedom to choose life, even as it purports to allow for choice.

There are other options. Hospice allows a terminal patient to die naturally without artificially extending life, without lingering in a cruel and inhumane vegetative state. This option is open to all and requires no legal sanction.

Frances Rossi, Denver

This is the hill to do battle on?

Re: “I support Trump, Musk and Gulf of Mexico,” July 11 letter to the editor

A letter writer declares her support of President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. So she apparently supports reducing health care for the poor and disabled (Medicaid cuts), reducing taxes on the rich, cutting federal support for science, sending people to foreign prisons without due process, elimination of foreign aid (so China can fill the gap), expanding production and use of coal and oil (not clean energy), bullying esteemed universities and law firms, cutting National Park staff, and the general dismantling of federal programs that serve the public. But with great courage, she cites her opposition to one of the most consequential of Trump’s proposals — renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. It’s a good thing she is not running for Congress, because that opposition would surely prompt Trump to destroy her candidacy.

David Wolf, Lakewood

The mayor should focus on the mundane

Re: “Big swings, mixed results,” July 13 news story

It is good to know that Mayor Mike Johnston recognizes he is a failed poet. Now, he needs to recognize he is a failing mayor. While he sits around and dreams up the best adjective to use for his next tax and spend scheme or grandiose project (thanks for pointing out that “vibrant” is his favorite), like a professional women’s soccer stadium or a new Broncos playground, the mundane, day-to-day tasks of running a city fall by the wayside.

More and more unencumbered thugs brazenly shoplift in broad daylight. According to Denver Police Department patrol officers they are to overlook expired license plates because pulling them over could be construed as racism. The officers will go on to explain that those very vehicles are the ones most likely to harbor people with outstanding warrants as well as drugs, not to mention forfeiting hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in revenue that citations and fines for these and other “minor” violations would generate. Abandoned vehicles sit on streets for weeks or months at a time, creating potential biohazards as they reek of meth.

And, most recently, major streets in Denver have become muffler-free drag strips.

Real mayors take care of the not-so-glamorous business of keeping a city safe and clean, not dreaming up the next pie-in-the-sky phrase. I’m hoping a strong candidate or candidates will step up and take this guy on in the next couple of years. He is a poster boy for why so many Americans have become disgruntled with Democrats and view them as elitist dreamers, not doers.

Matt Bergles, Denver

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Updated July 22, 2025 at 1:30 p.m. Due to an editor’s error, a letter contained the incorrect details from the lawsuit against the Boulder Valley School District. The Jones family wrote for The Denver Post that the teachers were directly instructing children on gender fluidity. The editor changed the letter to reflect the facts in a different federal lawsuit, Mahmound v. Taylor.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

False hope from the Epstein battle

Re: “Trump slams his supporters over Epstein ‘hoax’,” July 17 news story

If there’s one thing everyone ought to know by now, it’s that President Donald Trump never suffers for his infidelities and other misconduct. There’s no doubt in my mind that Elon Musk is orchestrating the current coup on the right. That’s fine, and it’s entertaining to see allies, insiders, and loyalists throw fits at Trump.

We should not delude ourselves, however, about whether these detractors will fall right back in line when it counts. They will, like they always do. They just approved his omnibus budget weeks ago.

Besides, no one likes Vice President JD Vance. No one wants Vance as president. Not even Trump supporters.

What we should expect is that the Epstein files will be redacted and released. Trump will carry on being a horrible president. He will probably fire several people after this blows over.

Nate Craig, Boulder

Government leaders need to get off wrong side of history and gain new perspective

In the book “Mark Twain” by Ron Chernow, I found the perfect explanation for why many people conformed to “the terrifying power of the environment to shape and distort human behavior.”  He was referencing the justification of slavery by so many otherwise good people, including clergy, but it explains so much more.

I grew up in the 1940s and ’50s in what is now referred to as a “red state.” And I must admit that I was a racist, believing that whites were intellectually superior to Blacks. My parents didn’t use racial slurs and were kind, but they erroneously judged Black people harshly. Sadly, that was more liberal than many locals felt.

I was an adult when I moved to a more neutral environment and was gradually exposed to reality.

But this is not about racism per se. It is about sequestered groups and communities that seldom are exposed to other views of the world.

That Chernow quote is the best explanation I’ve found to understand how good, kind people can accept the travesties taking place.

Yes, immigration is broken, but we turned our heads for years and took advantage of the workers. Send back the criminals and the more recent arrivals, but have empathy for those who have been here for years, raising families, serving the communities, and often serving in the military.

We have known there has been waste in all government departments for decades. It must be corrected — but not with a chainsaw and mindless, inhuman, vindictive overkill.

Congress and other branches of government must be more informed by their awakened constituents than they fear the president.

David L King, Erie

Wasting life-saving food supply

Do Trump supporters have limits? I had to wonder this when I read in The Atlantic that the Trump administration will incinerate 500 tons of high-energy biscuits. These are emergency rations that could feed 1.5 million malnourished children for a week. They were intended for distribution in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but the elimination of the USAID funding (and the whole program!) means this $800,000 stockpile will expire and is slated to be incinerated.

Is this the American way? Are there no limits to what Trump fans will put up with in their allegiance to him? I can’t believe Republican congressmen are so fearful of being primaried that they put up with these daily outrages.

I would think any decent person would be as repulsed by this as I am. Yet it’s just another day for this administration. I pray for the day when the rats will leave the sinking ship.

Chris Mech, Gypsum

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Aurora City Council and Mayor Mike Coffman made the right decision on Monday not to ask voters for pay raises, but the question before them lingers over many growing cities across the state and deserves an honest answer and assessment.

We know that many city council members in Aurora, one of the nation’s 51 largest cities, are working far more than a part-time job representing thousands of constituents across the sprawling municipality. For many Aurora residents who would consider running, the part-time salary of $22,000 makes it impossible to do the job well because holding a second job would be a necessity. Conditions are even worse in Colorado Springs, where city council members still earn what is essentially a $6,250 stipend, and in Greeley, where voters recently rejected a pay raise, keeping the salary at $12,600.

We want public office to be open to everyone, not only to the independently wealthy.

Still, we applaud the Aurora mayor and city council members for rejecting this particular pay package.

Pay raises must be commiserate with work expectations.

Voters in these cities should be asked two questions at the same time: should the job description for their city councils change to full-time with more frequent meetings and more expectations, and should the pay be increased to go along with those new hours?

City Manager Jason Batchelor, who requested the raises for his bosses, is right that the job overseeing one of the nation’s largest cities is no longer part-time, but the City Charter must change first to make the positions full-time before salaries jump from $22,700 to $75,000 for council members.

There are many issues with Aurora’s City Charter – particularly how it handles discipline, hiring and firing in the police department – and we don’t think the city should be afraid of asking voters to amend the document. In an election in 2023, voters approved several fixes to the charter.

We know many city council members work more than just the two public meetings a month, but we are also certain that many do not. The pay increase must be commiserate with an official increase of hours worked. Even elected officials need accountability. If the charter changes and council members are working a full-time job every week then we think an annual salary of $75,000 would help attract qualified and committed candidates without attracting people who are in it for the money.

As for the mayor’s salary, which would have increase from $98,500 to $150,000 annually, we have to agree with Mayor Mike Coffman that it is inappropriate.

Coffman, perhaps one of Colorado’s most honest and forthright politicians, pledged to oppose putting the measure on the ballot unless his salary increase was removed from the proposal.

“Public service is, by itself, supposed to be a sacrifice,” Coffman said.

Amen.

We appreciate the selfless people who step into the limelight to serve their community, often taking on public scrutiny and uncomfortable situations in addition to late-night meetings and campaigning. We agree that making the job full-time will generate more economically diverse candidates who can hold the position without trying to also hold a full-time job, something that today is hard to do with any kind of position that doesn’t have extreme flexibility.

The last thing we want is for public office to only be available to the affluent.

But, in the case of the mayor, we think $98,500 is a full-time salary that a person in Aurora could live on without having to maintain a second job.

We’d also like to point out that in many of these cities, elected officials are already getting cost-of-living increases annually.

People, whether elected or at-will, should be paid for the work they do. These cities are booming, and we no longer think part-time council work is sufficient to meet the needs of the community. Once the roles change, their salary should increase as well. But not before.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Government leaders need to get off wrong side of history and gain new perspective

In the book “Mark Twain” by Ron Chernow, I found the perfect explanation for why many people conformed to “the terrifying power of the environment to shape and distort human behavior.”  He was referencing the justification of slavery by so many otherwise good people, including clergy, but it explains so much more.

I grew up in the 1940s and ’50s in what is now referred to as a “red state.” And I must admit that I was a racist, believing that whites were intellectually superior to Blacks. My parents didn’t use racial slurs and were kind, but they erroneously judged Black people harshly. Sadly, that was more liberal than many locals felt.

I was an adult when I moved to a more neutral environment and was gradually exposed to reality.

But this is not about racism per se. It is about sequestered groups and communities that seldom are exposed to other views of the world.

That Chernow quote is the best explanation I’ve found to understand how good, kind people can accept the travesties taking place.

Yes, immigration is broken, but we turned our heads for years and took advantage of the workers. Send back the criminals and the more recent arrivals, but have empathy for those who have been here for years, raising families, serving the communities, and often serving in the military.

We have known there has been waste in all government departments for decades. It must be corrected — but not with a chainsaw and mindless, inhuman, vindictive overkill.

Congress and other branches of government must be more informed by their awakened constituents than they fear the president.

David L King, Erie

Reconsider red-light cameras for safety

I recently traveled to Miami, and my GPS device warned me of red light cameras at traffic lights while I was driving. It turns out that many lights have cameras (at least in Miami Beach, where I was staying). They actually work as cars stop before the light turns red, rather than racing through as we often see here.

Why? Because drivers know a camera will catch them if they don’t stop. I would like to see more of those here, and think the accidents they help prevent outweigh the arguments that these cameras are a threat to civil liberties.

Thomas H. Brady, Wheat Ridge

Presidential struggles with truth-telling

Those of us of a certain age grew accustomed to presidential administrations’ intentional struggles with the truth a long time ago —  LBJ’s falsehoods about Vietnam; Nixon’s about Watergate and related matters; Reagan’s about Iran-Contra; Clinton’s about Monica Lewinsky; W. Bush’s non-existent “weapons of mass destruction”; and, Biden’s… let’s just say his memory about stories he told failed him. But Trump takes the cake, hands down.

Fact-checkers have largely given up due to the huge volume of falsehoods. So please understand we want to see the receipts on “obliteration versus heavy damage” and Iran spiriting away the enriched uranium prior to the bombing.

Public trust is built heavily on transparency and truth, so don’t be so surprised about the lack of trust in our elected officials and stop attacking journalists who are trying to get the truth.

John W. Thomas, Fort Collins

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Too fragile to understand our history?

Re: “Signs posted seen as threats to ‘whitewash’ dark side of history,” June 28 news story

The term “snowflake” is often used to insult political liberals. With the power invested in me as a U.S. citizen, I nominate President Donald Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Bergum our Snowflakes in Chief.

Are these men so fragile and fearful that they need to waste and abuse our time and space by defacing signs in our National Parks and Monuments because these two men can’t cope with the truth?

Bergum says signage should highlight the beauty of these places. We are people with sense.  We do not need signage to tell us what is beautiful.

Are President Trump and Secretary Bergum insulting our intelligence to infer that visitors to these sacred places cannot simultaneously appreciate beauty and absorb difficult information about past occurrences? Shame on them!

Face the truth! Do what the people say! Hire more rangers and maintain the trails!

Evan Siegel, Westminster

Sad to see  the end of Job Corps

Re: “Great Society-era program on the chopping block,” June 29 news story

I was saddened to read the article, which states that 99 Job Corps centers across the country have been ordered to close because of low graduation rates and failure to achieve the intended outcomes of its charter.  What an inglorious end to a program that benefited so many young people during its formative and early years.

I served as a remedial education teacher in two conservation centers in the first two years of the program’s existence in 1965 and 1966 and as a consultant to the program for several more years.  In those early years all enrollees participated in meaningful and productive work programs during the day and in education programs in the evening.  The outcomes of both program components made enrollees and staff, as well as program auditors and members of Congress, proud of their association with the program.

The program has obviously deteriorated over the years.  I’m sorry this is coming to an end, but it appears it is no longer the stellar program it once was.

Mark McGoff, Arvada

What does Denver’s Central Library need?

Re: “Denver spent $60 million on its library — and it still closes every Friday,” July 10 commentary

Thank you, William Porter, for your commentary. I came to Denver right out of college. My first job did not require a college degree and did not pay a commensurate salary.

My first week in town, I got my library card. The Central Library was my haven, a place where I could still dream about my future.  That was 55 years ago. I have avidly supported any funding for the library for all those years, but, because of its limited hours, it is much more difficult for me to use the new improved library, and more difficult for me to justify voting for additional funding.

Is that what it would take to return the library to a full-service level? Or do they need increased staffing, more security,  more volunteers, or what? I think the library needs to be transparent about what it would take to return to being the award-winning library it once was. The status quo is not good enough.

A. Lynn Buschhoff, Denver

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Gov. Jared Polis’s pedestrian bridge is not without merit, nor does it have to be an assault on the historic district, as some critics have claimed. Adding an interesting and functional architectural feature and tourist attraction to a struggling part of the city is a good idea for an entire state that relies on tourist dollars.

The problem with the project, intended to memorialize the state’s 150th birthday, is that it jumps a long list of unaddressed capital improvement projects, and skimps on artistry and historic value. The state has a process for spending its limited dollars maintaining everything from the magnificent Gold Dome to ancillary storage buildings. While it is unclear if the money will come from some other source or not, it is true that all dollars are fungible. Cutting in line for a project only released to the public a few short months ago is very bad form.

We don’t blame the members of the Capital Development Committee for balking at the request for about $10 million toward the $28.5 million price tag.

Rep. Tammy Story, a Democrat who chairs the committee, struck a sound note when she wrote to The Denver Post: “This $29 million ‘art installation’ is financially irresponsible and completely tone-deaf.” Indeed, the state has some financial problems, and our economy is slowing.

But let’s not scrap the Colorado 150 Pedestrian Walkway. Rather, let’s tip the scales of the public/private investment more heavily toward donors.

Asking the committee for a few million dollars that will be used to leverage $20 million or $30 million in private donations is much more palatable than the current 60/40 split that has the state picking up most of the tab.

There is a price to cut in line of a carefully curated and considered list of projects, and the current plan to only raise $11 million for the project is not enough.

We appreciate that this state’s civic leaders are ponying up millions of dollars to invest in art, culture and, yes, pedestrian safety at one of the state’s busiest intersections — Colfax and Lincoln. We’d love to see this bridge completed with Colorado artists getting paid for their work.

The state’s Capitol complex is a true gem. From the steps of the Capitol looking west, visitors see a panoramic view that includes our iconic skyline, art museum, Central Library, Denver’s beautiful city hall and our majestic mountains. Adding an architectural marvel at the ugly intersection will only enhance the view of Lincoln Veterans Memorial Park and Civic Center Park.

Several times a year, these parks are filled with visitors coming for festivals and protests. And while our unhoused neighbors do spend time in the park, gone are the unsanitary and unsafe encampments that for a time after the Black Lives Matter protests and COVID shutdowns took over the area.

Tammy Story is right to question the appropriateness of spending public dollars on something that is nice-to-have while deferred maintenance and other needs go unmet.

And John Deffenbaugh, president and CEO of Historic Denver, is right in his call for the bridge to conform to the design principles of the Denver Civic Center Historic District.

“We welcome change and believe that with sympathetic design and under the right circumstances, preservation and progress go hand in hand,” Deffenbaugh wrote in a scathing letter that picked apart the design of the bridge as an affront to the “formal order, symmetrical balance, and neoclassical expression,” that dominates the district today.

We are shocked that the architectural firm employed for a portion of the $1.5 million already spent on design and planning didn’t take into consideration the district’s design guidelines, which have been in existence since 2009. Given this gross oversight in their performance, we are certain they will redraft plans that will mesh seamlessly with the neoclassic architecture that dominates the park. Imagine a marble bridge spanning from the Capitol to the City and County building in undulating waves like Colorado’s white water rapids.

These are not insurmountable obstacles, but Polis needs private donors and a visionary architect. Time is short before the state celebrates its birthday, and Polis leaves office. We wish him luck.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

The humane choice: Assisted suicide was a blessing for brother

Re: “Disabled people in the state need support, not a prescription to die,” July 6 commentary

I’ve always been a proponent of assisted suicide, but after reading Krista Kafer’s opinion on it, I can’t help but wonder if she’s ever actually had any real-life experience with it.

My 75-year-old brother was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer in September of 2024. After many weeks of appointments, MRIs, ultrasounds, scans, etc., his doctors determined that even after daily chemotherapy and radiation, he would only have a couple of months to live. He bravely decided to forego all treatment and take advantage of assisted suicide offered in California.

This decision was not easily made between him and his wife of 43 years. It was heartbreaking. But what was particularly devastating was watching the disease rob him, on a daily basis, of his faculties. In a matter of weeks he was completely paralyzed and bedridden, blind and not able even to feed himself. The assisted suicide law in California is strict. You are seen by more than one doctor, you must have an incurable disease, and you must be able to administer the cocktail of drugs to yourself.

I’m so grateful that this choice was available to him. Watching him robbed of his dignity was hard enough, but knowing that without this option, he could still be lingering in a nursing home in a vegetative state is cruel and inhumane.

If you don’t agree with assisted suicide, don’t do it, but don’t judge others and rob them of this option just because you disagree with it.

Ellen Haverl, Denver

Education opt-out: Rules for me, but not for thee?

Re: “U.S. Supreme Court got it right on parental rights and education,” July 6 commentary

“We want our daughter to grow up knowing that God made her wonderfully and perfectly in His image as a little girl.” Hmmm, sounds like gender dysphoria to me — a girl in His image, that would confuse me!

This family feels their religious liberty is being infringed upon because their daughter is being exposed to a reality that is different from the one presented in their bible. In that context, should my child get an exemption from Christian doctrine being foisted upon them, say, like the Ten Commandments being posted in their classroom? There’s a little hypocrisy here; you don’t want your child exposed to different ways of thinking, yet my child can be confronted with your way of thinking?

I’m sorry that those parents are subjected to harassment, which I don’t condone. However, education is all about learning about the world around you, and it doesn’t always conform to belief systems. Whether conservative Christians like it or not, in the real world there are people who aren’t comfortable fitting into conventional lifestyles. In science, which doesn’t care what you believe, there are few hard and fast definitions. Sexuality and gender, like most everything in life, lie along a spectrum which includes physical variation.

I’d like to see conservative Christians (including those on the Supreme Court) practice what Jesus preached, which is to love and accept your fellow humans for who they are, not what you think they should be. As well, I think he would have had you strive to understand rather than ignore the fact that people see and experience the world differently than you do.

Dan Eberhart, Denver

The very premise of this article is that the daughter is just how God made her. Therefore, her gender is the correct one for her, they maintain. However, they fail to recognize that the rest of her is “how God made her.” That would include her brain and her thoughts and feelings, and the way she decides important things in her life.

Transgender individuals are born the same way that their daughter is born. Given that some people are born “differently,” such as those with physical disabilities, blue eyes, or who are atheists, they are still how God made them.

Transgender people are made by God with thoughts and feelings that are real and tough, questioning their gender identity from within themselves. I understand it’s a tough battle because in the end, if you choose to be who you know you really are (another gender), you will be attacked for this just as the parents attack all transgender people by refusing to learn about them or let their children learn about them. Like others who are gay or shy or blue-eyed, etc., transgender people do not choose to be disliked for being who they really are.

The authors complain about hurtful pushbacks from others; they lack any insight into their own inability to empathize. Transgender people have built-in strong internal signals and struggles from birth about their gender, as God made them! Empathize and accept them, as Jesus would do.

Adoree Blair, Highlands Ranch

I think the Supreme Court got it wrong. The Court, it appears, like Trump and other Republicans, doesn’t like the nationwide injunctions issued against so many of Trump’s executive orders. Yet this ruling was heard and ruled on under the Supreme Court’s emergency “shadow docket,” which they use almost exclusively for Trump’s appeals from his lower court losses.

How fair is that? Trump is using the Supreme Court as his own court. And they’re letting him do it. The only duty of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts is to determine if the case before them meets constitutional muster. And, like the birthright citizenship portion of the Constitution, which is unambiguous, lower courts have a duty to protect people from an unconstitutional law that tries to abridge a right established in the Constitution. Making one protected plaintiff at a time challenge such a law is crazy and unreasonable. Putting the onus on the protected party is not right. Once the challenged law is shown to be in violation of the Constitution, the court has the obligation to rule as such and protect everyone who is affected by such an unconstitutional law.

Thus, a nationwide ban is necessary, especially when the portion of the Constitution protecting people can only be read one way! Making people in the protected class have to file multiple lawsuits is just supporting those who wrote the illegal law in the first place.

J. Linden Hagans, Lakewood

An executive order cannot supersede the Constitution

Re: “Birthright citizenship: A stunning and tragic Supreme Court decision,” July 6 commentary

I’m not a constitutional scholar, but I can read, and according to the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 of the Constitution, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

That’s all persons, with no mention of immigration status, ethnic origin, race, or gender. An executive order from the president cannot supersede the Constitution. A constitutional amendment can only be altered or revoked by another constitutional amendment. Amendments can be proposed by Congress or by a Constitutional Convention, adopted by a two-thirds majority of both Houses, and then ratified by the affirmative vote of three-fourths of the states.

The Supreme Court is tasked with the interpretation of these amendments. If the current court removes the right of birthright citizenship, the justices will be betraying the Constitution and creating an avenue for President Trump and any future presidents to interpret the laws however they want. This is not how a constitutional republic is supposed to function.

Cindy Clearman, Arvada

Side with the welfare of the children

First, columnist Krista Kafer got this spot on. Doctors should do no harm. Suicide assistants? Some of these countries are encouraging children to commit suicide?! What have we come to? Protect your children. Pray for them. Teach and encourage them.

And second, thanks be unto God that the Supreme Court got it right on parental rights. Parents are in charge of the education of their children. The government needs to mind the education of children and respect the parents’ rights to opt their children out of social education that they do not agree with.

Dee Walworth, Brighton

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

CU Regents need to commit to priorities

Re: “University of Colorado: Following investigation, board censures Regent Wanda James,” July 3 news story

Having spent 19 of my 30-plus years advocating for access to higher education, I am deeply troubled by the University of Colorado Board of Regents’ decision to censor Regent Wanda James. This action reflects a wider assault on higher education.

The Pell Grant program faces potential elimination, universities are pressured to dismantle essential support for underserved students, and all the while, funding for critical academic programs is slashed. The board’s decision exemplifies a failure in leadership and a lack of focus on pressing institutional challenges.

James rightly highlighted a racist depiction in a public health campaign about cannabis use during pregnancy. While her censorship is concerning, the approval of that campaign raises significant questions about internal checks and balances. Instead of fostering transparency and inclusivity, fellow regents chose to silence one of their own.

To those who voted for this censorship: I urge you to address the real challenges facing our $7.1B institution and the external threats to our education system with the same energy you directed at James for expressing her truth. You are responsible for guiding Colorado’s flagship university system; now is the time to show integrity, courage, and a commitment to equity and justice. Rethink your actions, recommit to your elected priorities, and do better — for James, all students, and the future of higher education.

Morris Price Jr, Denver

Throwing support behind Trump, Musk and Gulf of Mexico

I am both a supporter of President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. I do, however, disagree with changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

I lived for several years near the Gulf of Mexico and spent a lot of time on the beach. The Gulf of Mexico is rich in history as the name suggests. Changing the name will only result in a loss of history. I never felt, while lying in the warm sands of the Gulf of Mexico, that I was not lying on American soil.

Susanne MacDonald, Broomfield

We are a nation of immigrants, but we need guardrails

It is starting to get redundant and pointless to keep hearing that we are a nation of immigrants in order to justify the acceptance of illegal immigration, of which a certain percentage now seems to be a serious criminal element.

Yes, our country was settled by immigrants, often displacing native citizens in the process. So, let’s bring us up to date. We are now a stable nation of citizens with a Constitution and laws regulating immigration, for which there are many good reasons. Every country has laws regarding immigration; we are not unique in that respect.

We accept immigrants into the United States, and as a country of laws we have every right to determine who we will accept, under what circumstances, and how many. The dangers of unregulated immigration, as has happened with the last administration, created many hazards for our citizens and our country. We had no idea how many criminals, gang members, and covert agents entered our country. In many cases, we have paid a price for that situation, some with their lives and property.

As a nation, we should continue to show compassion, and immigration should proceed according to our laws and needs. We cannot fix all the problems of the world, but we can help.

William F. Hineser, Arvada

Yankees eyeing Rockies’ McMahon

Re: “If Rockies love McMahon, Marquez, they’ll trade them,” June 20 commentary

The Yankees would be fortunate to grab third baseman Ryan McMahon if the Rockies are willing to part with him. The topic du jour on Yankees sports radio is the need for a third baseman. They just moved Jazz Chisholm, Jr., one of their best offensive players this season, from his fill-in role at third base back to his natural defensive position at second.

McMahon would be a perfect fit, considering he was a Gold Glove finalist four straight years and a 2024 All-Star.

Adam Silbert, New York City

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Disappointment in lawmakers expressed after ‘The One Big, Beautiful Bill’ passage

Re: “GOP milestone: House gives final approval in tight vote to Trump’s big tax bill,” July 4 news story

While Republicans claim that their “The One Big Beautiful Bill” will strengthen Medicaid by eliminating the usual waste, fraud, and abuse, it is more telling that their changes to Medicaid will not go into effect until after the 2026 midterm elections. If there’s waste, fraud, and abuse, why wait two years to deal with it? The reason is that they won’t have to fear the political repercussions of the pain and suffering from all those benefits they promised. Voters need to see through this.

Dan Danbom, Denver

Re: “Trump tax bill: Hurd voted party line; so did the rest of state delegation,” July 4 news story

Rep. Gabe Evans’ commercial states that his vote is for Colorado families. Evans is giving them crumbs, however. He voted to give the rich loaves.

James Maki, Dacono

Re:  ” ‘Big beautiful bill’ is ugly for state residents’ health,” July 4 commentary,  and “Small colleges depend on their endowments; the tax should not be raised,” July 2 commentary.

America is over $37 trillion in debt, which is considerably greater than our $27 trillion GDP. The only way to resolve this financial crisis is for America to export more than it imports. This can only happen if America reindustrializes and is able to create novel technologies that will be marketable. This will also help solve some of the myriad crises facing the world (e.g., climate change vis-à-vis green energy).

However, President Donald Trump and Elon Musk have utterly decimated science and higher education in America by defunding both. Where will the engineers who design and build our factories come from — especially when international students (who largely pursue STEM) are no longer welcome here? How will we fuel innovation when there is sparse funding for scientific research?

Cutting taxes and aiding the wealthy elites of this country will not solve America’s debt crisis as it falls further behind technologically. Only strong support for scientific research and higher education will.

Michael Pravica, Henderson, Nevada

To Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski: If we ever needed a hero, last week was the week. And Sen. Murkowski, this was your chance to show your mettle. This was the vote you could show how strong, committed, and ethical you are. This was the time to do the “McCain” vote. This was the time to be a hero. Not everybody is afforded this opportunity.

Ah, but no. You, like so many of your colleagues, chose the easy way out. You knew the “Big, Beautiful Bill” was ugly and wrong. Before your vote “yea”, you stated that fact. Your vote said to me that you are too weak to stand up for the Constitution and the American people. Instead, you got what you could for yourself and your special interests in Alaska. You know millions of people will be hurt and many will die from your decision, but you don’t care.

Don’t think for a minute your GOP comrades hold you in esteem. Trump used you and others and now you are nothing to him. “The Murkowski” vote will be added to history books with that of Benedict Arnold, the Rosenbergs, and Donald Trump. You failed the test. Your legacy will be one of disgrace and dishonor. You blew it for yourself and our country.

Carol Kiernan, Westminster

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.