To the Editor:

I am writing in response to Sarah Laribee’s Oct. 29 column, “Adults responsible for youth. Censorship appropriate for certain life stages.” In this day and age I find it appalling that a soon to be teacher is writing an article which states that “encouraging the young to expand their minds as much as possible… is wrong.”

The example that she gives is that of Bourbon Street New Orleans after the sun had gone down, and how her father took her and her sister down a back street to avoid it. Now, one that did not live a sheltered or censored life would have the knowledge that most have of Bourbon Street, especially after dark, and could “choose” not to go down to it.

I would also like to ask that she refrain from telling the reader that she is a “staunch supporter of the First Amendment…” while in the previous five paragraphs promote censorship. Lastly I would like to pose a question. As it ever occurred to Ms. Laribee or any of us that the problem might lie in the adults? After all I doubt that it is millions of dollars in milk money from little kids that allows “certain books” to keep going or that keeps Bourbon Street alive.

Or maybe censorship is a tool used to keep people, or children, from seeing, or reading, things that a individual or group, for their owns reasons, does not want them to.

Chris Ulrich

Senior art major

To the Editor:

Recent articles on Amendment 28’s attempt to repeal voting at the polling places omit the most important reason to vote no on 28.

Article VII, section 8 of our state constitution specifically guarantees the right to vote by secret ballot. There will be no more secret ballots if Amendment 28 passes. We will be forced to put our ballots inside an envelope and sign our name on the outside. Any government official could open the envelope and see how we voted. If our votes are politically incorrect, our ballots can be tossed in the trash. We won’t be there to see that happen.

Because this statute violates the constitution, it will end up in court. Elections using mail ballots only will be in doubt until the case is resolved. If Amendment 28 passes, we may never be able to undo the damage because any ballot issue to repeal 28 would have to use the same fraud-prone election process.

Those who want to mail in absentee ballots may do so now. The rest of us should have a choice, but under Amendment 28, we will lose our right to vote in person by secret ballot.

Apart from that, do we want election outcomes dependent on our notoriously inept post office? Don’t take that risk. Defend your right to vote. Vote no on Amendment 28.

Carolyn Myers

Elbert, Colo. resident