ÎOn the Spot' hardly funny, pretty Îbland'

I was reading "On the Spot" by Nathan Tafoya today, and well, I finally realized something. There is literally no point to such an article. It doesn't make me laugh, it doesn't give me some new outlook on an issue, and it's not a good conversation article or even an article that makes sense. So please, help me out here: What exactly is supposed to be going on with "On the Spot?" I can see that it is introducing the UA community to some of its members, giving light to people's random quirks. I can easily respect something that acquaints the masses with everyday people, but where is the heart in "On the Spot?" It is just so bland and boring. I really fail to comprehend how this section is supposed to affect the UA community. So please, a little help ·

Alan Fullmer
journalism and photography freshman

Abortion procedure unnecessary thing

In any debate, it's important that both sides know the facts. Clearly, Ms. Tate, who wrote a letter to the editor Friday, is unaware of the facts surrounding the recent ban on partial birth abortion.

The assertion that partial birth abortions are performed rarely and, if so, in cases of medical necessity is false. Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, told the New York Times and other news outlets that partial birth abortions are performed by the thousands on healthy babies of healthy mothers (see www.nrlc.org).

Secondly, President Bush is not catering to the "religious right" by signing the ban on partial birth abortions. According to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, he is catering to 70 percent of the Americans surveyed, along with a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate who agree that this procedure, in which a viable fetus is partially delivered before being stabbed in the back of the head, should be banned.

But Ms. Tate and I do agree on one thing: Think about your sexual freedom. More importantly, appreciate it and be thankful you have it. Over 44 million Americans, and many others,lost that right when they were aborted under the guise of "choice."

Risha Zertuche Brown
NAU alumna

Tuition dollars must go to faculty salaries

Suggesting that the funds raised by increased tuition should go to financial aid is a lowly attempt to keep the UA in a welfare state. The current problem at the UA is that there is not enough money; giving even more money away will not fix that, only exacerbate it. The only acceptable use of the money tuition will garner would be to increase teacher salaries.

Dan Norwood
pre-computer science sophomore

Muslims very eager to share, educate

Seth Frantzman is a good example of the very people that these commentaries about Islam are trying to reach. Frantzman probably would have been a lot happier if the Wildcat published articles attacking Islam and calling Muslims a bunch of terrorists, like some articles did last year. Muslims, on the other hand, would be happy to read articles about other religions. After all, one of Islam's main fundamentals is the belief in Jesus and Moses and all of the other prophets and messengers. Many Muslims felt a need to inform people about Islam after being targeted by hate crimes and media propaganda. Up until recently, the Muslim community on campus has been very quiet. Now that some of the Muslim students have started to speak and organize events that benefit the Tucson community, people like Frantzman are getting upset! Instead of complaining, write something about a religion that you want to share with us. No one is trying to take your faith. And Allah, my friend, is the same God that Christians and Jews and people of other faiths pray to; it's just the Arabic word for God, so you don't need to freak out. But I have to tell you: Your letter was quite entertaining.

Tarik El-Azzouzi
systems engineering
graduate student

Athletes must be held to same standards

In Tuesday's letter by Dan Norwood, "UA athletes not paid enough, deserve more," he states, "Instead of complaining about how over-valued student athletes are, we should really realize how underpaid they are." Oh please, Mr. Norwood! Underpaid? So what if UA athletes get paid only $880 a month? Such athletes, like Fox, are getting a free ride for their education as opposed to the majority of UA students!

In Isaiah Fox's case, he knew beforehand about what his scholarship was going to cover. If Fox needed more money, he should have gotten a job over the summer and worked for it! If Fox did work and still didn't make enough to go on, he could have asked others for a helping hand! Fox could have asked his friends, family and maybe Lute Olson for some cash along the way! If eligible, he could have gone to financial aid and received a loan! If Fox can't come up with the money, oh well! Fox will have to face the same type of reality as most college students ÷ not having enough money to get by! Therefore, Fox has no reason good enough to steal!

Fox's actions at the U-Mart show he doesn't appreciate being an athlete on scholarship. His money problems are short-term compared to those of most students. In the long run, Fox is going to have a chance at making millions in the NBA, while most students will be struggling to get by after graduation. Those who are under-valued have the right to complain and those who are over-valued don't have that right! Therefore, I don t have any sympathy for those who have it better than others!

Donald Wilson
sociology senior

Ramadan good time to educate on Islam

Seth Frantzman's interpretation of the recent focus on Islam is unfortunate and misguided. I truly believe that nobody on campus or in the Wildcat is trying to convert him to Islam. Ramadan is not only a significant time for Muslims, but it is their only "holiday" many western students have ever heard of. Because of this, Ramadan is the perfect time for the normally quiet and underrepresented Islamic community to encourage understanding and to diffuse the unwarranted hatred against their community. If the public was never educated on HIV/AIDS, we would all still think it was the "gay plague." Only through education can the Muslim community quell the intense bigotry of Americans ÷ the same bigotry that is found in Friday's letter. I am sorry if phrases such as "Islam is a religion of peace" and "Allah be praised" offend him, but to me it is no different than "Praise the Lord."

Frantzman's problem seems to be with Islam, not the endorsement of religion and campus-wide proselytizing. If this were his true beef, his letter would have mentioned the high-pressure evangelism that targets freshmen. I have a friend who would not sleep at his dorms on Saturday nights because, after repeated requests to be left alone, the Christian organizations would be at his door every Sunday morning. Or what about the preachers who littered our Mall last year with their messages of hate and shame under the guise of Christianity? Never in my life have I heard so much hate and damnation as when one student disclosed to a Mall preacher that he was both Jewish and homosexual.

I do agree with Frantzman on one point: I doubt that the Wildcat will run articles about Christianity and Judaism during Lent and Yom Kippur. I attended Christian school every day until college and I believe most students don't know the first thing about their own religion.

Nicholas Ross
optical sciences and engineering sophomore

Accurate information dispels Muslim myths

This is in response to the letters bashing the Wildcat for printing articles about Islam and Ramadan. I was born and raised as a Muslim in America. Throughout my school years, the only holidays ever talked about in school were Christmas and Hanukkah. I clearly remember having to sing Christmas songs many times. I applaud the media for providing the public with a better understanding of Islam and its holidays. The public is bombarded with images of a few misguided Muslims. We need to change this image by showing this is not how the majority of Muslims think. I look forward to the Wildcat publishing articles about other religious holidays, as has always been done. Salaam. Peace.

Adeel Zafar
UA alumnus

Puritanical legislation a big backward step

We are living in difficult times. While many European countries ÷ such as Germany, Spain and the Netherlands ÷ are struggling to modernize, becoming gradually more liberal and progressive both in politics and thinking, the United States seems to be traveling in an entirely different direction, backpedaling into a period of residual conservatism. As a liberal-minded student, I was disheartened Wednesday afternoon as I watched George W. Bush sign into law a bill that bans partial-birth abortions. Now, as a pro-choicer, I have been called virtually every name under the stars, including the most common and a few more creative ones. I wouldn't think that it would need to be said, but I am merely pro-choice, not an extreme advocate for abortion procedures. In a free country, a woman must have the option to do what others may regard as unconscionable. That is the consequence of living in a democratic state.

The measures taken by Mr. Bush reflect what can only be described as an attempt to push through an ever-increasing agenda of radical conservatism, the likes of which we haven't seen since the Reagan years and which began shortly after he took office (when he declared a partial ban on stem cell research). This ban on partial-birth abortions is the latest by the president to reduce the United States to a society more Puritanical than our European counterparts. Over the past few years, he and many other Republicans have expressed their hopes for a return to American values. The question must then be raised: Whose values? My moral absolutes do not include a desire for women and scared teenage girls to seek back- alley abortions. If the ban on

partial-birth abortions is seen as a first step, then there can be little doubt that this will be the logical progression of Mr. Bush's plan for America.

Matt Selsor
art history junior