Transgender bathrooms make life “uncomfortable”

To the Daily:

I should have seen it coming. The introduction of transgender bathrooms must be the next logical step in the advancement of the homosexual agenda. We have gay marriages, gay adoption, so why not have gay bathrooms?

Allow me to answer this. The article in yesterday”s Weekend, Etc. magazine (“Unisex bathroom creates alternative for people in need,” 1/24/02) tells that these bathrooms came into existence (first in the Union and soon to be in the University Health Services building) so that those who don”t ascribe themselves to a typical gender or sexual preference won”t have to feel uncomfortable in a regular bathroom. Gay rights groups on this campus would certainly like you to believe these bathrooms are normal, being that you are one of the few heterosexuals still wandering about the University”s campus (picking up the sarcasm?).

Big numbers proclaim about 10 percent of the population of the United States to be gay, while in reality that percentage is slightly less than 3 percent. So what”s happening with these bathrooms? The vast majority of people are put in an uncomfortable situation so that a small group of people who have made a choice to live a certain lifestyle can feel comfortable with themselves. For me, this just doesn”t add up.

Mike Saltsman

LSA freshman

Raiji”s column too hard on God, Catholics

To the Daily:

Manish Raiji”s Jan. 23 column (“I don”t care if God tells you it”s wrong”) frustrates me. Raiji is a little hard on Catholics, in my opinion, and I happen to be a Catholic. Most Catholics do not believe that abortion is wrong because God tells us it is wrong. Most Catholics believe abortion is wrong because it kills fetuses.

Raiji says the most salient argument against abortion is a secular one: An appeal to universal human rights. But on what basis do human beings have rights? Every person has a different answer.

My answer is Jesus Christ, God himself, who dignified the human race with his presence, and showed us how much our lives are worth. If God exists, and if God is good, then there is no realm of human experience in which God is irrelevant. I agree that it is expedient to leave God out of discussions of social importance. I”m just not certain whether it”s right.

Daniel Propson

School of Education student

Religious should “promote views,” shun mediocrity

To the Daily:

Manish Raiji”s column (“I don”t care if God tells you it”s wrong,” 1/23/02) seemed to take a very unkind view of religious people.

Of course people do a lot of really dumb things in the name of religion and they do dumb things on their own, too. But if I profess to follow a religion, wouldn”t I be a rather mediocre follower if I didn”t think it was the true one? Most religions in America are hardly pluralistic.

If I honestly believed that these were God”s commands, I should take them seriously indeed, and I should promote my views to the best of my ability. Otherwise I”d be like the guy with the answer to the homework in a room full of frustrated students who doesn”t give out the answer (or at least the correct method).

Now, it would be nice if people would use a little wisdom and consideration for others when they go about promoting their points of view, but I don”t think we should fault them for doing it. If you don”t want to be convinced, just don”t listen.

Abigal Short

LSA sophomore

Caron”s letter full of tired “anti-American” themes, contradictions

To the Daily:

I”m writing to address some of the baseless, sweeping charges made by Sean Caron in his letter (“U.S. built on blood, exploitation,” 1/24/02).

He complains that a previous letter, which expresses hope that Taliban/al-Qaida prisoners “rot in hell,” is a piece of “xenophobic trash.” While I agree the “rot in hell” argument wasn”t very sophisticated, Caron”s letter doesn”t display a much more advanced arguement. It merely rehashes a bunch of overused anti-American themes that fall apart under a little scrutiny.

First, Caron said that you could claim “Americans kill without reason,” just as the Taliban/al-Qaida do. There are 3,000 good reasons lying dead in New York and Washington. The Taliban/al-Qaeda kill because they hate Americans and our Western values of tolerance and plurality. We kill in order to prevent future innocent deaths and head off further terrorist atrocities. It is sheer blindness to call these aims morally equivalent.

Second, Caron claims that “this country was built on blood and exploitation.” That”s a very trendy statement to throw around these days, but that doesn”t mean it”s true.

The United States has a lot of warfare and racism in its past, and nobody is proud of that. But it also has a lot more hard work, ingenuity and statesmanship. Countries that are truly founded on “blood and exploitation” like, say, the Soviet Union or Third World dictatorships don”t end up doing very well. Our success has been despite, not because of, the ugly parts of our history.

Third, Caron claims that Americans are only motivated by money, and that they will kill to make more money. Let”s see, we”re spending about $2 billion a month to fight terrorism, plus millions more to guard the peace in Kosovo, Bosnia, etc. Not to mention the millions in aid we recently promised to Afghanistan, and ongoing aid to dozens of other countries. Oh yeah, our foreign policy is just raking in the dough.

Finally, Caron writes, “we have no right to damn others for doing what we have done in the past.” If ruthless, senseless killing was objectively wrong when we did it, then it was objectively wrong when the Taliban/al-Qaida did it. End of story. Caron implies that a wrong can only be condemned by those who are perfect.

That”s foolish a wrong, especially an eggregious wrong like terrorism (and mysogyny, if you count the Taliban) can and must be condemned anytime, by anybody. Simply because it is wrong.

Patrick Walsh

School of Education student

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.