To the Editor:

I am writing in response to Robert Lee’s letter to the editor in Monday’s Collegian. Firstly, I did not read the original article to which Mr. Lee refers to, so I apologize in advance if I do not have the full picture.

Mr. Lee states that comparing homosexuality with skin color in terms of an individual’s psychological makeup is “absurd.” According to Mr. Lee, homosexuality is a choice and not a biological fact like race. He closes his letter by condemning the Collegian’s viewpoint as “simply ignorant.”

Well Mr. Lee, I do not think that the intent of the Collegian’s editorial was to infantilize homosexuals, nor was the intent to plead for the heterosexual community’s pity, as you call it. The intent is to state that race, gender, or sexual orientation is not matters of free will, but rather of biological predisposition. I did not choose to be white, male, or heterosexual–it’s just who I am.

There is plenty of research being conducted that infers that sexuality may not be a social issue. A homosexual friend of mine once told me that he always knew that he was different. He always liked boys. He didn’t just wake up one day and decide to choose homosexuality. Who would choose a path that leads to discrimination and isolation anyway? A homosexual lifestyle is certainly not an easy one.

Maybe next time Mr. Lee decides to come to the so-called defense of homosexuals he will think twice and leave homosexuals to speak for themselves.

Chris Woodard

Asst. Women’s Swim Coach

Colorado State University

To the Editor:

This letter is in response to Robert Lee’s comments published on Monday (Oct. 21). His letter addressed the statement “being gay is as much a part of someone’s personality as race is.” Robert was correct in saying that this statement is absurd. Race doesn’t dictate personality, but he forgot to say that sexuality does not define an individual’s personality either. I’m sure this was a simple oversight.

In addition, he stated that sexual orientation is a choice and that “the Collegian is asking individuals to pity those who have made the decision to be gay.” This is where I can no longer agree with Mr. Lee. First of all, neither homosexual nor heterosexual individuals ask for pity because of their sexual orientation. You pity someone who has ruined his/her life because of alcohol or drug addiction-not someone whose sexual preference is different than yours.

Second, as a scientist I could not overlook the statement Robert makes that it is “simply ignorant” to say individuals are genetically predisposed to their sexuality. A quick journal search at the library reveals many publications on genetic links to sexuality. Most studies contradict Mr. Lee’s comment. One such study is titled “A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation.” The principle investigator was Dean H. Hamer, Ph.D. Similar studies have been published in reputable journals like “Science and Genetics”. A good deal of scientific evidence is quickly dismissed by Robert’s unsubstantiated opinion. His statement is . . . well. . . “simply ignorant.”

Daniel Dugger

2nd Year

Professional Veterinary Medicine

To the Editor:

I would like to remind fellow Colorado voters that even though (in the last election), the majority of us overwhelmingly approved the medical use of marijuana, our elected servants seem determined to deny the people what they have so strongly and so democratically indicated they want.

Both Gov. Bill Owens and Attorney General Ken Salazar opposed the medical marijuana initiative right from the start. That’s fair enough and these people are entitled to their private opinions. But, the initiative passed by an extremely clear mandate and is now Colorado law. It is not the public duty of these people to uphold and defend Colorado law as enacted by the democratic process?

Neither Salazar or Owens seem to think so. After this law took effect, Owens and Salazar sent a joint letter to the Colorado Medical Society warning that any doctors who prescribe marijuana risk the loss of their medical license. They then sent a letter to the U.S. (federal) Attorney Richard Spriggs calling on him to enforce federal law to and asking his office to prosecute anyone (doctor or private citizen) who prescribes, uses or cultivates any marijuana for medicinal use as approved by Colorado law.

So much for democracy and the will of the people.

Regardless of where one stands on the issue of medical marijuana, I think most Coloradans would agree that democracy is kind of nice. If you support either the democratic process and/ or medical marijuana, please join me in boycotting the reelection of both Owens and Salazar. Luckily, there are several other well- qualified and less arrogant people to vote for. The Green Party has excellent candidates running for both positions. Ron Forthofer and Sunny Maynard are both quite supportive of liberty and justice for all.

Mark Dalpiaz

Salida, Colo. resident