S.U.R.E. is surely not progressive
It was easy for the Daily Bruin and others to criticize Student
Empowerment! and our predecessors as a dominant political force on
this campus. S.U.R.E. was supposed to check that and be a
progressive alternative. I hope people having been paying attention
and realize that S.U.R.E. is neither progressive nor an
alternative.
I have seen little come from David Dahle and his S.U.R.E.
counterparts. Instead of serving the student body and getting us
organized around issues like the recent student fee hike, all we
have seen from S.U.R.E. is inconclusive unscientific polls and
infrequent attendance at council meetings.
What is Dahle doing for the student body when all we see is
written in an occasional Viewpoint submission or letter to the
editor? If all Dahle wanted to do is write Viewpoint submissions,
maybe he should have applied to be a columnist.
Bryant Tan
Former Academic Affairs Commissioner
Editorial board promotes racism
The University of Michigan policy of adding points to minority
applications is inherently racist. This judges applicants by the
color of their skin. Anything sound wrong with that? Yes, the
policy does create a more diverse campus, but at the expense of the
most qualified students. The non-minority student with the perfect
scores could get passed over for minority students who have lower
scores but got a huge boost from the points the policy gave them.
The best university is the one with the best students and cannot be
achieved by such a policy.
People should “not be judged by the color of their skin
but by the content of their character.” Why does the Daily
Bruin editorial board wish to support a racist policy? How would
any of you like it if you were excluded from UCLA because someone
else was chosen over you because of the color of their skin?
Joe Groff,
Second year, history
Affirmative action is an insult
If professional basketball followed the rules and regulations of
the Michigan admissions office, the highest caliber of players
would not be on the court demonstrating their awesome skills and
improving the overall quality of the game. The same is true
with affirmative action: you are denying some truly great minds
from achieving their fullest and improving the overall quality of
the game we call society based solely on their ethnicity ““
something that is out of our control.Â
By stratifying the races, you are telling one group
that they must be literal geniuses to make up for their
race and you’re telling another group they are not smart
enough on their own and need special help to get into a
university. How insulting to us all! Martin Luther King
Jr. wanted a colorblind society, where we would be judged
“not on the color of our skin, but on the content of our
character.”Â
Gabriel Greenacre
Second-year, political science
Littering is a serious problem
It is long overdue that someone made a perfect point about
littering on campus. I am in 200 percent agreement with Rachel
Shasha’s column “Littering on campus disrespects
Bruins” (Jan. 21). Littering is sometimes beyond belief at
school. We need to remind ourselves that school is the holy home
for learning and if we consider ourselves highly educated then we
must conduct ourselves accordingly–with a high standard of
civility. Thank you, Rachel, for bringing up such a burning
issue!
Douglas Lee
Third-year, applied mathematics
Abortion rights advocates hypocritical
On the 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I’m appalled by
the news coverage (including that of the Daily Bruin) regarding the
abortion issue. Since the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision, the
lives of over 40 million unborn children have been taken, in the
name of “women’s rights.” It’s ironic that
the abortion rights advocates who demand the unrestricted power to
destroy the life of the unborn child happen to be the same ones
protesting a war in Iraq, where “innocent” people would
be killed. How can these people reconcile the murder of defenseless
children while condemning our president? In addition to condoning
the murder of innocent, defenseless children, they are completely
hypocritical.
Lores Rizkalla
Class of 1990
Sex does not cause maturity
I found Father Mark Speeks’ response to Adir Levy’s
column “All sex, no love make Jack awfully
desensitized” (Jan. 15) to be very upsetting, especially
because his rationale was “practice does make perfect”
and, to paraphrase, sex can promote emotional maturity. With STDs
and HIV rampant, and teen pregnancies at the levels they are, I
find Speeks’ statements irresponsible, immoral, and
self-indulgent.
Let’s say that sex among young adults does promote
emotional maturity, as Speeks would have us believe. At what age
would he place the limit? 18? 21? I’d like Speeks to express
his beliefs to the vast majority of teen and young adult mothers
who have given up their lives to raise children alone. Some may say
it was their choice and they should live with it, but I do hope
people are more compassionate than that. Where are the deadbeat
fathers? I guess they are somewhere becoming very emotionally
mature.
Mavrick L. Goodrich
First-year, astrophysics and political science