Pope Francis gave hope to LGBTQ+ Christians
The death of Pope Francis is a profound loss for LGBTQ+ Christians around the world.
While the Catholic Church’s relationship with queer people has long been fraught, Francis cracked open the door to something previously unthinkable: mercy. He asked, “Who am I to judge?”— a question that echoed through pews and Pride parades alike. He chose accompaniment over condemnation, recognizing that LGBTQ+ people are not issues to be debated, but human beings to be embraced.
Francis did not rewrite doctrine, but he reshaped tone. He met with same-sex couples, blessed LGBTQ+ Catholics and spoke against laws criminalizing homosexuality. In doing so, he offered something radical in a time of moral panic and rising anti-LGBTQ+ hate: the idea that faith and queerness need not be in conflict.
For those of us who have sat in church pews wondering if we are loved by God, Pope Francis offered a glimpse of a gentler gospel — one where dignity is not earned but affirmed. May his memory be a blessing and may his legacy challenge religious institutions to love more bravely.
With all our contradictions and faith, we say thank you, Papa Francisco.
— Romario Conrado, San Rafael
Disappointed by ruling halting MC lights project
It was disappointing to read that Judge Sheila Shah Lichtblau granted an injunction halting the field lights project at Marin Catholic High School in Kentfield (“Judge grants injunction on Marin Catholic field lights,” May 6). What is more enjoyable for students, athletes and families than Friday night football games under the lights?
I bet that even some of what appears to be just a handful of people who represent the Preserve Ross Valley neighborhood group that filed the complaint went to Friday night games in their youth. According to the story, “The group contends that the lights would exacerbate noise, traffic and light glare from the stadium.” If they live that close to the MC campus, I suspect they must be bothered by the constant noise and traffic on Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, as well as the noise and lights at all hours generated by the MarinHealth Medical Center.
At this rate, I wouldn’t be surprised if the group begins complaining about the sound of splashing at the campus swimming pool. They might as well, the way some of them have really gone off the deep end in regard to the lights.
— Dave Lenzi, Corte Madera
Some recently published descriptions are off-base
In his April 27 IJ letter, Robert Mathis argued that peaceful protesters oppose “destroying the infrastructure of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education, NATO, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (formerly NAFTA), immigration and the value of the U.S. dollar.” I consider that unfounded and absurd. I expect the Department of Government Efficiency’s efforts to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse will ensure that funds allocated by Congress reach more of their intended beneficiaries. Current deportations enforce existing law while using tariffs to enforce free trade reduces trade deficits and strengthens the U.S. dollar.
Mark Silowitz, on April 29, wrote of “illegal deportations.” With only the possible exception of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Trump administration is deporting those already under deportation orders — or those apprehended with them that are here illegally. In my opinion, administrative “due process” is adequate in those cases; drawn out court processes only delay the inevitable and strain our overburdened system.
On April 30, Elaine C. Johnson wrote “funding for veterans’ services, early education for children and humane foreign aid should be evaluated, not just mindlessly slashed.” That is precisely what President Donald Trump’s administration says it is doing after DOGE evaluations.
Michael Sillman, on May 2, scoffed at election integrity and implied that I am “undermining the faith of voters in free and fair elections.” On the contrary, we are working to restore that faith. Sillman may as well argue that exposing fraud is worse than allowing it to continue.
On May 4, Stephen Schmid wrote “the savings from cuts made by (DOGE) is much smaller than advertised.” Compared to the 2024 federal spending of $6.8 trillion, the $165 billion in DOGE savings is a pittance. I believe more cuts are needed.
I consider all the aforementioned views to be misguided and I believe they were caused by deeply ingrained, fact-resistant hatred of Trump.
— Francis Drouillard, Novato
