 |
 |
Editor:
I would like to comment on the Nov. 20 story "Would-be donor drops chastity requirement." In this story, the people interviewed have stated that Ms. Keith's offering of a scholarship to Native American women from Arizona is unfair given the strings attached to this money.
The Oxford American Dictionary defines fair as "just, unbiased, impartial" and defines impartial as "not favoring one more than another."
Given this information, I guess it is appropriate to ask: Is it fair that only women can qualify? No. Is it fair that only Native Americans can qualify? No. Is it fair that only Arizona residents can qualify? No.
These points were never raised by the people interviewed for the story.
Now let's ask if it is fair that only childless, unmarried students qualify?
The answer is no as well. It is interesting to note that this last point is a requirement for any Air Force or Army cadet or Navy midshipman at the federal service academies. To paraphrase G. Bruce Meyers (assistant dean,Nativie American Student Affairs), is the federal government implying that cadets and midshipmen are loose, immoral, and need to be watched more than other students? Of course not.
So what is my point? My point is that virtually any scholarship can be seen as "unfair", with unfair being in the eye of the beholder. I think that Ms. Keith should be allowed to specify how her gift is used. If she wishes to target a certain group, then let her.
If you don't agree with her requirements, then don't apply for the scholarship! I'm absolutely sure that if this gift is accepted by the UA, it will be put to good use by helping a student through college.
It would be a shame if this opportunity was lost to another university!
Richard B. Koehler
graduate student
School of Renewable Natural Resources
Richard B. Koehler
|
|
|