Stonewall Flag Debate Calls for Reasonable Compromise

Readers weigh in on the debate over the rainbow flag at Stonewall National Monument

Published on Feb. 14, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A letter to the editor discusses the debate over the display of the rainbow flag at the Stonewall National Monument, arguing that a reasonable compromise can be reached that preserves the hierarchy of the American flag while acknowledging the historical significance of the rainbow flag. Other letters touch on topics like the firing of Washington Post employees, the firing of a TV personality for expressing her opinion, and the need for increased awareness and funding for colorectal cancer research.

Why it matters

The debate over the Stonewall flag highlights the ongoing tensions between honoring national symbols and acknowledging the significance of LGBTQ+ history and identity. Finding a balanced approach that respects both could set an important precedent for how commemorative sites handle the display of non-national flags.

The details

The letter writer argues that at commemorative sites, a single historically relevant flag could be flown below the American flag, not as a rival or show of activism, but as context. This approach, they say, preserves the hierarchy while acknowledging history. The other letters discuss topics ranging from the business decisions of media companies to the need for increased cancer awareness and research funding.

  • The debate over the rainbow flag at Stonewall National Monument is ongoing.

The players

Tomas Santiago

A reader from Chicago, Illinois who wrote a letter to the editor about the Stonewall flag debate.

Bill R.

A reader from Suffolk County who wrote a letter to the editor about the firing of employees at The Washington Post.

Maureen Sharkey

A reader from Brooklyn who wrote a letter to the editor about the firing of a TV personality for expressing her opinion.

Jeffrey Reynolds

A reader from Garden City who wrote a letter to the editor about the need for increased awareness and funding for colorectal cancer research.

Jim Tubrid

A reader from Bronxville who wrote a letter to the editor praising an article by Jonathan Turley on the American Revolution.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“While federal property properly prioritizes the US flag, seriousness requires proportionality, not overcorrection. There is a reasonable middle ground: At commemorative sites, a single historically relevant flag could be flown below the American flag; not as a rival or show of activism, but as context.”

— Tomas Santiago (New York Post)

“If the terminated employees thought that they had a job for life, that was their most recent mistake.”

— Bill R. (New York Post)

“She should not be punished for expressing a freedom we as Americans believe and fought for. The people at E! should be ashamed of themselves.”

— Maureen Sharkey (New York Post)

“Colorectal cancer is now the leading cause of cancer death in Americans under 50, yet awareness and research funding remain woefully inadequate.”

— Jeffrey Reynolds (New York Post)

“Finally, Turley's focus on Thomas Paine's key role in both revolutions is simply fascinating to me. Many historical figures remain just that, historical. But it seems that Paine's relevancy extends uniquely even into current times.”

— Jim Tubrid (New York Post)

What’s next

The debate over the display of the rainbow flag at the Stonewall National Monument is ongoing, and it remains to be seen if a compromise solution can be reached.

The takeaway

This collection of letters highlights the range of perspectives on issues like commemorative site displays, media company decisions, free speech, and public health awareness. While the topics vary, the common thread is a desire for reasonable, balanced approaches that respect different viewpoints and priorities.