Arizona Daily Wildcat
Friday, April 15, 2005
Don't hate beautiful women
This article is in response to Zach Sonnenberg's hatred of sorority life. I happen to be an Alpha Phi from the wonderful Chico State University and have been wearing "big sunglasses" for years now. I only started to wear them because it covered up my scratched cornea (which had a heinous patch over it), but one day my best friend Kelli told me that they looked totally good and bought a pair for herself. Since that day, we've pretty much been more popular than Jesus here at Chico. Anyway, my point is that just because a variety of fashion is worn out of necessity and becomes popular doesn't mean that was the intention. Don't hate, appreciate.
Chico State junior
Car sales don't belong on Mall
Yesterday I noticed the area around McKale Center had been turned into an automotive sales lot. Apparently some type of Chevy-UA partnership to sell a bunch of cars in order to teach undergraduates economics or because the mechanical engineering students are reviewing automotive designs. Actually, I've been trying all morning to think of something further from the educational mission of this university than turning the campus into a car sales lot and I've yet to come up with anything. What in the world is the UA doing hosting an auto-sales event on campus?
I am ashamed and embarrassed by this flagrant display of corporate consumerism on campus.
soil, water and environmental sciences graduate student
Campus car dealership a disgrace
As an employee of the National Solar Observatory, and therefore a quasi-member of the UA faculty, I have to take issue with the parking situation on the grassy commons area that flanks Campbell Avenue. For years, I have been saddened to see that sporting events warrant it acceptable to use this area as a parking lot. But today, this university has thrown out all logic in the use of this common area. Frankly, I was absolutely disgusted to witness that this common area is now a car dealership!
I challenge you to present a reasonable explanation for turning an institute of higher education into nothing more than a platform for private business to profit.
One more question as well: Does each and every student/faculty member receive a dividend for each car sold? After all, isn't it the students who pay to use this land?
National Solar Observatory employee
Community college degrees not prestigious
Although those who attend community college should be commended for their effort to obtain a higher education, Mr. Richard's argument, while ideologically noble, is unrealistic in America's competitive business market. For example, regardless if there is truth to the belief that Ivy League schools provide a better education, and thus, produce higher qualified individuals than state universities, it cannot be denied that in most instances, individuals with degrees from an Ivy League school will be perceived as better qualified than an individual with a degree from a state university.
Mr. Richard claims that community colleges are producing students equal to the UA. Academically, how many Nobel Peace Prizes or Rhodes Scholars graduated from the UA in comparison to a prestigious school? Of those, how many attended a community college? For example, according to the Rhodes Scholar Web site, since 1996 not one individual attended the UA, let alone a community college. However, of the 32 selected each year, an overwhelming majority attended prestigious schools.
As mentioned earlier, while Mr. Richard's argument is a noble one, a degree from a community college is perceptually and seemingly academically weaker than a degree from a four-year university. While sociology may argue that for the average individual, where one attends college is irrelevant to income earned in the long run, it does not negate or change the perceptions of the people and organizations playing key roles in a student's future. In closing, given the chance to attend Pima Community College, the UA or Cornell, which would you choose?
philosophy and political science junior
Bill affirms gun rights, Wildcat coverage biased
While the issue of allowing firearms in alcohol establishments has been on the table for quite a while now, yesterday's article in the Wildcat contains perhaps the single most revealing quote to come out in the issue's recent history: that of Mr. Dennis Arnold, owner of Gentle Ben's, who states, "If this legislation passes, we will be posting signs the next day that state 'no guns, no knives, no contraband, you morons.'"
You know what? I don't think it's a good idea to allow firearms in Gentle Ben's either! However, Mr. Arnold entirely misses the point.
The fact is that the bill will not affect bars whose owners justifiably don't want firearms in their establishments. Consider "calmer" establishments like Applebee's or various other family restaurants that happen to have a bar. What right do the owners of such "rowdy" establishments such as O'Malley's have to determine whether a father can defend his family in an establishment such as Applebee's? None! What power does the bill have over "rowdy" establishments? None, perhaps except for the owner's obligation to purchase a few signs.
So let the owners who want firearms have them. Let the owners who don't want firearms not have them. It's that simple.
It's time for our state Legislature, and all legislatures, to adopt some concept of
individual choice instead of acting like parents of young children.
Shame on the Wildcat for an undeniably biased article. Paragraph four introduces the National Rifle Association's support with no reasoning and Democrats' opposition with reasoning. The article as a whole contains a mere two quotes by SB1363's supporters and five quotes by opponents. These two supporters' quotes are the only supporting opinion the bill receives in the entire article. The Wildcat may not like the NRA or gun rights in general, but that doesn't excuse it from showing us a clear picture of the issue.
political science sophomore
Understand columns before judging
Did Connor Beckley even bother to read Dillon's article? He never once showed any support for limiting the rights of others. He said people shouldn't put their money into these things (pornography and violence) and the industry will stop putting it out. How does that translate into putting restrictions on porn and movies/games? I may not agree with him completely (e.g. I will still buy violent games), but his methods are completely legitimate. I'm pretty sure that he is aware of the fact that he is part of the malignant media he is attempting to malign. What better way to create change than from the inside?
computer engineering sophomore
Community colleges good, four-year degrees subpar
This is in response to Ross Richard's letter, "Community college degrees not subpar."
The point of Matt Gray's original opinion piece was not whether an associate degree from a community college was adequate or not, it was whether community colleges should offer bachelor's degrees. The Cochise College nursing program that Mr. Richard refers to is not a bachelor's degree program; rather, upon graduating, the students receive an
associate of applied science degree.
Reading over my original letter, Mr. Richard will see that I am in favor of community colleges offering two-year degrees, such as the Cochise College nursing degree he so adamantly favors. Indeed, I will be the first to admit that community colleges serve as a very important cog in the education wheel, both as a means to an end and as an end itself. What I am not in favor of is community colleges offering bachelor's degrees as the education received at the community college level is not on par with the education available at four-year universities, such as the UA.
Unfortunately, it seems that Mr. Richard is having a hard time grasping this very simple concept. Perhaps, in order to avoid this type of confusion in the future, he would be well served by enrolling in a few reading comprehension courses ... at Pima.
general biology freshman
Abortion akin to murder
"Oh no! The condom broke." "It's OK. I'll just get another abortion if the paternity test rings positive."
This is a far too common phrase uttered by irresponsible members from the leftist brigade. I know what you are thinking, my fellow right-minded friends: "Don't you just want to shake some sense into these murderers?'' Yes, yes I do. I want to shake vigorously until they realize that lives are being destroyed before given a chance on this earth. "But wait!" Yes, my despicable liberal enemy?
"What about the rights of the mother? It's her body, therefore it's her choice to do with it as she pleases." Rights of the mother? Please. What about these rights? Let's say my wife chooses to jab a coat hanger deep into the soft spot of my 3-month-old son. I mean he is really inconveniencing her. She has to take time out of her busy day to feed the insignificant creature. Oh, and by the way, he is causing her some pain by biting down on her tender nipple. It's her body, and he came from her, so therefore it is her right to bludgeon the brains out of my precious infant, utterly destroying his young life. I'm really starting to see your point on this issue. I guess from now on when an annoying non-sensist, such as yourself, inconveniences me; I will be sure to harm you in any way that suits me. It's my body, right? Therefore I can do with it as I please.
creative writing junior