'Slapdash' does disservice to HIV issues, patients

I am writing in response to Thursday's "Slapdash" comic in which a man tells a woman, "Good news! I passed my test," and shows her an HIV-positive test result. I am used to "Slapdash" being tasteless, but this comic is crude and offensive and shows the cartoonist's terrible ignorance of HIV issues.

HIV is definitely not over in the U.S. and is not only a "gay disease." There are HIV-positive people of every demographic group in Tucson and on our campus. Students who do not protect themselves can contract HIV, just as they can other STDs. There is nothing humorous about an HIV test. Many people are fearful of HIV testing and its results can be devastating. In the U.S., treatment is available, but an HIV-positive test result still guarantees a painful death from AIDS. Making light of the situation is insensitive to all people who are courageous enough to find out their HIV status.

HIV infection among middle class Americans is increasing now and the global AIDS epidemic is escalating to unthinkable heights. Today, 8,000 people worldwide will die of HIV/AIDS, 15,000 new infections will occur and thousands of people worldwide have received an HIV-positive test result, including some in Arizona and in Tucson. These people deserve our support and care if they are to live with HIV. "Slapdash" on Thursday and so many of our other insensitive thoughts (e.g. "HIV infection is a person's own fault") only increase the stigma surrounding HIV. As students, we are an intrinsically young and sexually active population. We must be educated about HIV prevention and be sensitive to the reality that HIV is affecting our local and global community. Printing Thursday's "Slapdash" was a setback in the fight against HIV.

Lauren Giesecke
junior majoring in Spanish and mollecular biology
Student Global AIDS Campaign

Transportation system would reduce car use

I would like to respond to a letter printed on page four of Thursday's Wildcat.

Kara Karlson missed the point regarding Proposition 200 and Proposition 201.

She argues that she should not have to pay for the upkeep and improvement of mass transit systems that she will never use, because she is not asking others to provide her gas money. However, as many continue to have this mentality, we

continue to build roads that become increasingly congested. Furthermore, urban areas continue to sprawl into the desert, often leaving behind dilapidated city centers. Many cities are attempting to curb this vicious cycle with "downtown revitalization" plans. But if people don't live and feel connected to their downtown community, then many of these plans are likely to fail. Ironically, in Tucson, the Rio Nuevo Project is attempting to reconnect two halves of the greater downtown area, currently bisected by Interstate 10.

A more reasonable solution is to reduce our dependence on the automobile. If people lived and worked more centrally we could spend less money on roads and infrastructure like sewers, streetlights and signs. Costs would go down while the city tax base would be enhanced without annexation of outlying areas. If the light rail and bus systems are clean, efficient and convenient, riders will be happy to leave their vehicles at home - or sell them altogether - as they leave for a day at work.

More importantly, the costs of driving an automobile are not confined to what we pay at the pump. The costlier result of the daily commute comes in the form of pollution and loss of open space. We see the effects in asthmatic children, global warming, contaminated ground water from leaking fuel pipelines - the list goes on and on.

Kevin Bonine
ecology and evolutionary biology adjunct assistant professor

Bible has nothing to say on homosexuality issue

As an ordained minister and psychologist, I am writing in response to the recent letters about sexual orientation. A vocal minority claims that it is possible to change sexual orientation. These attempts are not credible and may constitute psychological malpractice.

I find that using selected passages to prove that being gay or lesbian is something wrong takes those texts out of context. The word, "homosexuality," didn't exist in any language until little more than 100 years ago. The concepts of sexual orientation and constitutional homosexuality are inventions of psychology.

Some critics assert that Paul condemned homosexuality as "unnatural." They miss that for Paul it was unnatural for men to cut their hair and women to uncover their heads. Paul's condemnation in the book of Romans is about idolatry, not sexual orientation.

Citing Leviticus' prohibitions about not "not sleeping with a man as with a woman" fails to acknowledge that this text is about the fertility religions of ancient Mesopotamia. In creating Jewish identity, codes of behavior were established to distinguish the early Jews from their neighbors, including kosher dietary laws and wearing of clothing woven from more than one fiber. Leviticus states that imitating these religions was an abomination. These prohibitions are not related to constitutional homosexuality or loving relationships.

Central to the Biblical story is that all people are created in the image of God. The command of Jesus is to love others in the unconditional way that we have been loved by God. Abusive attempts to change the genetic predisposition of sexual orientation not only fail to live by the great commandment of love but deny the image of God at the heart of the individual. While claiming to be Christian, such individuals fail to live the basic Christian moral code.

Rev. Louis F. Kavar, Ph.D.
minister, United Churches Campus Ministry

'Sarape's Grill' offends only Caucasian people

Yesterday I opened my beloved Wildcat to find more ranting against "Sarape's Grill," the comic that intolerant people love to accuse of being "offensive." It's once again ironic that the only people who are offended are non-Hispanic and the only people who write in defending the comic are Hispanic.

Apparently the comic is deeply offensive to Caucasians because it dares to confront their stereotypes of Hispanics. Hispanics know that Mexicans don't wear sombreros anymore, just like whites don't wear Pilgrim hats - that's what's so funny about it!!!

I myself love the comic, especially when Mr. Bermudez shows the irony behind the argument that his comic is offensive by making his characters bland and boring. Those that claim the comic is offensive are the true racists because they want the Wildcat comics to only portray white characters and Caucasian humor. Those that accuse Bermudez of racism are examples of the new tolerance that thought police who everyday try and censor open-minded voices like that of "Sarape's Grill."

"Sarape's Grill" is respectful of Hispanic culture; in fact, today's comic finds one of the characters angry at a young boy who has forgotten how to speak Spanish. Keep up the good work, Mr. Bermudez; don't let these Philistines censor you!

Seth Frantzman
UA alumnus