Arizona Daily Wildcat Online
sections
Front Page
News
Opinions
· Columnists
Sports
· Men's Hoops
Go Wild
Live Culture
Police Beat
Datebook
Comics
Crossword
Special Sections
Photo Spreads
Classifieds
The Wildcat
Letter to the Editor
Wildcat Staff
Search
Archives
Job Openings
Advertising Info
Student Media
Arizona Student Media Info
UATV -
Student TV
 
KAMP -
Student Radio
The Desert Yearbook
Daily Wildcat Staff Alumni

Mailbag


Arizona Daily Wildcat
Wednesday, March 2, 2005
Print this

Reactions, statements don't compare

In his Monday column, columnist Matt Gray compares the reactions among faculty against Harvard University president Lawrence Summers to University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill. He argues that academics pressuring Summers to resign from his presidency while supporting Churchill to stay in his tenured professorship have a double standard. This is hardly the case. There is pressure on Summers to resign from his presidency, not from his tenured professorship. Ward Churchill resigned from his department chair position soon after the controversy broke out, at his own will, because he didn't want his views to be associated with his department. Summers, by not resigning from his position as a university president after having expressed his views, is risking questions that may be raised about the decisions made under his presidency regarding hiring women faculty in science and engineering departments at Harvard. Comparing the faculty reactions to Professors Summers' and Churchill's statements is like comparing apples to oranges.

Simge Kucukyavuz
industrial engineering visiting assistant professor

Shisha gateway drug for marijuana

Hookah is a safe alternative to marijuana? Yeah, maybe. I like to think of it as more of a gateway drug. Bongs are used to smoke marijuana, that's a fact. Bongs are also used to smoke shisha. Anyone else see the correlation?

Dan Parmelee
MIS/OM sophomore

Term 'emo' overused, unnecessary

I've been reading the comics section in the paper's last few issues, and as someone who has been called an "emo kid" since the term exploded a few years ago, I have grown sick and tired of the talk. Honestly, I didn't even know what the correct definition of "emo" was until recently when I finally blew up at someone for putting me into the, "oh ... it's one of them" category. They, of course, couldn't explain what an "emo kid" was, but they did however, know how to pick one out. I found out a little bit later that the term 'emo' stood for "emotional." Now this is the part that really bothers me. Is it really possible that something such as today's boundary-less music be too full of emotion? Omar Rodriguez-Lopez of The Mars Volta says it best: "I think the most ridiculous label I've heard to date is "emo." How can anything you put your heart and soul into not be emotional?" I believe that in a society where labels control every aspect of our lives, something should be done to crush the unnecessary ones. The term needs to be abandoned already, because quite frankly, I'm "hurting too much" to let this go on.

Derek Schloss
undeclared freshman

Rape doesn't signify homosexuality

Sodomy may come from Sodom, but God did not destroy the town for homosexuality. Gang-raping someone does not make you a homosexual; if that were the case that means all male prisoners who rape their cellmate are homosexual and that is not the case. Sodomites wanted "to know" the angels for the same reason some prisoners rape their cellmates or other inmates, to show them who is in charge; it is not about homosexuality but about boundaries and power. On a side note, the book of Jubilees, though found in the Ethiopian Bible, is simply a book that tries to explain Genesis too literally. If you read it you know it says Cain married his sister. Are you saying that homosexuality is wrong but incest is OK, Mr. Callaway?

Angel Del Valle
religious studies sophomore

Religion shouldn't influence Constitution

I recently read an opinion submitted by a student who was radically opposed to gay marriage and stood to support the constitutional amendment that would ban such unions. In the letter, amongst rambling on about useless and inaccurate claims, the student brings up the issue of religious opposition to same sex marriage. Herein lies the problem: We live by the mandates of a document that applies to all of the citizens in this country. To make it clear, ask yourselves: Is every citizen in this country religious? The obvious and truthful answer to that is no. With that in mind, again pose a question to yourselves: Why should a document that applies to everyone in this country be influenced by a religion or an ideal that does not apply to everyone? Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that marriage is between a man and a woman and it, by the ideals of equality on which this nation was founded, should remain that way. All citizens should share an equal right to enter into a marriage of their choice.

Braaden Schmidt
mechanical engineering and engineering management freshman

Civil Rights, gay rights different

Blacks were fighting for the rights that everybody else already had. Gays have equal rights. When they choose to set themselves apart from the rest of society, they're giving up certain privileges. If you choose to open a restaurant, you give up the privilege of having an open schedule at night. Same principle. Choices come with consequences. Everybody else seems to understand that concept. Why is it so difficult for the gays to understand?

Sodomy is still illegal in many states and for good reason. The gays now want it to be celebrated. What color are brides supposed to wear to gay marriages? Brown? Would they have "his" and "his" vanity towels?

Furthermore, my kids won't need the Bible for them to know that there's something wrong with a man kissing another man.

Rob Monteleone
media arts junior

Health care costs cause issues in U.S.

In an Associated Press article, the plan to pay for more and more of the health care costs for the population has caused some "really, really big issues." Apparently there were some "unforeseeable" consequences about increasing the amount of dependency the population has on the government. The government is projected to pay half of all medical costs by 2014! And this will squeeze out other entitlement programs that liberals have fought for, who would have thought! There are a few choices, including: raise taxes, give the responsibility back to the people, or pay no attention to it and hope it will go away. This is just another example of how there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Kara Karlson
journalism junior



Write a Letter to the Editor
articles
Can girls do math?
divider
Minuteman project not worth a second
divider
Mailbag
divider
Restaurant and Bar Guide
Housing Guide
Search for:
advanced search Archives

NEWS | SPORTS | OPINIONS | GO WILD
CLASSIFIEDS | ARCHIVES | CONTACT US | SEARCH



Webmaster - webmaster@wildcat.arizona.edu
© Copyright 2005 - The Arizona Daily Wildcat - Arizona Student Media