To the editor:

 Uncategorized
Nov 162004
 
Authors:

Buffy Hasting's letter stated we should be horrified by President George W. Bush's re-election. What we ought to be horrified about is that a CSU graduate student could write such drivel and get it published. Hastings' "indictments" of Bush included:

1) Bush appealed to nationalism, using mottos, slogans and symbols. Buffy: every candidate appeals to these things; Kerry's motto was "for a stronger America," remember? He even used (GASP!) red on his signs.

2) Bush is obsessed with national security. Maybe Buffy doesn't remember, but we were attacked recently, and with weapons of mass destruction, national security damn well better be high on the priority list of everyone in public office.

3) Religion and government are intertwined, thanks to Bush. Nonsense. Never have we been in a time when government and religion were more separate, much to many people's chagrin. Kerry appealed mightily to the religious, too; Buffy is upset that Bush was more successful.

4) Bush is concerned with supremacy of our military. As one pundit said: If the president announced a cure for cancer, Democrats would complain about all the lab rats put out of work.

6) Cronyism and Corruption. Hasting throws out completely random assertions. In fact, it was former President Clinton who was in many people's eyes the most corrupt and cronyistic president in modern history (and impeached for it).

I'm all for political debate, but groundless, hysterical, hate-filled letters like Ms. Hasting's do not elevate our political discourse. Are there no editorial standards whatsoever at the Collegian?

Jerry Magloughlin

Associate professor, geosciences

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

To the editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 162004
 
Authors:

Ben Bleckley's recent editorial ("That better be a cotton shirt you're wearing") in the Collegian on Monday concludes, "the theological argument (against homosexuality) does not hold up to scrutiny." This is certainly true, but not for the reasons Mr. Bleckley gives. He points out that Jews and Christians condemn homosexuality based on scriptural passages that forbid it while they ignore other mandates in the Bible, such as prohibitions on "the wearing of clothing containing more than one type of fabric," women entering church while menstruating, women speaking in church, etc.

Though Bleckley is right to point out the hypocrisy involved here (and that seems unavoidable when trying to live a life according to any religious text), such hypocrisy does nothing to disprove the claim that homosexuality is immoral, especially if that claim is based on scriptual. At most, Bleckley has shown that Christians and Jews need to either justify their observance of some, but not other, scriptural commandments, or they need to be more consistent in their observance of Biblical directives. Very good arguments against those who cite scripture in condemning homosexuality do exist, but Bleckley has failed to offer one.

 

Kevin Stanton

Adjunct instructor, philosophy

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

To the editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 162004
 
Authors:

Contrary to Mr. Bleckley's opinion, the Bible's teaching regarding homosexuality and sin is clear and supported by numerous verses. Ben referenced Leviticus 18:22 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. There's also Leviticus 20:13, "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable …" and Romans 1:27, " … Men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." The Bible clearly condemns homosexuality in these verses. Also, there's the Biblical teaching on fornication-having sex with someone you're not married to (this denounces premarital sex as well). Addressing fornication are Hebrews 13:4, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Colossians 3:5-7, and Jesus, Himself, in Mark 7:21, "… Out of the hearts of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders …" The Bible demonstrates that marriage is designed for a man and a woman (Genesis 2:18-24, and any other verse about marriage in the Bible), and any sex outside of marriage is sin. Thus, homosexual relations are condemned. There is also the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19, which illustrates God's disapproval of homosexuality. Please don't label me a gay-hater. I'm not promoting homosexuality as a worse sin than any other, I'm simply addressing Ben's article. Every sin is despised by God equally, and the Bible clearly states that homosexuality is one of those sins. To espouse otherwise is simply denying the evident.

Joshua French

Graduate Student, statistics

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

To the editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 162004
 
Authors:

This is a response to Greg Kushner's letter. On Tuesday he argued that accusations against Bush for reinstating the draft came from the Democrats during the election. I would like to offer an alternative perspective. Consider that right now the U.S. military is stretched incredibly thin. Soon after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, President George W. Bush extended almost every soldier's term of service. Bush has begun calling soldiers off of inactive duty, usually the last step before enacting a draft. The U.S. continues to talk tough to North Korea and Iran, provoking hostility. Neither President Bush nor Sen. John Kerry addressed the issue of China and Taiwan during their campaigning: the pledge we made decades ago to defend Taiwan in the event of an invasion from China. Our military cannot possibly confront the problems it seems to be facing with our global lack of support and our economy in the shape it is in. Does anyone really believe that a draft will not be reinstated simply because President Bush and the Republican Party deny these accusations?

Eric Olsen

Senior, English

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

To the editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 162004
 
Authors:

In response to John Walsh's column regarding parking services in the Collegian Tuesday, I can't emphasize enough that you and other students in the same situation can avoid parking tickets by simply reading the signs that are clearly posted in the lot. Take, for example, the area you were referring to – the "U" lot near Lory Faculty Housing. If you had actually paid attention and read the posted signs in the lot, you would have seen that there are three one-hour stalls and several 20-minute load zone stalls that everyone is entitled to park in, regardless of whether or not you have a "U" permit. Furthermore, if a sign is creating some confusion, it is only logical and in your best interest to park elsewhere to prevent the possibility of getting a ticket. So avoid getting your next parking ticket by paying attention, instead of pointing the finger at others for your misfortune.

Randall Scheinert, junior electrical engineering

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

To the editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 162004
 
Authors:

I would like something to be said about all the yellow ribbons in the Oval on Friday. I think that was so awesome. Students take for granted the freedoms that are being fought for by soldiers who risk their lives every day and are the same age as many of the students at CSU. My best friend will be leaving for Iraq at the beginning of December, and I am currently waiting to be told when I will be going. We are both students at CSU. We are disappointed that we have to leave the school and our friends and families so much, but there is not a shred of regret for joining the military in this time of war. I want to thank whoever put up those ribbons, and I hope to see more of the same in the near future.

 

Brian Budden

Sophomore physics major

 Posted by at 5:00 pm