Student Voices in Action sends mixed messages

To the Daily:

I consider myself a liberal and believe that many of the ideals
held by Student Voices in Action do hold promise for the University
community. In my opinion, the idea of a student committee
participating in administrative decisions can only help to create
an academic atmosphere that further allows students’ needs to
be met and input to be encouraged. I find its request to the
University to investigate the problem of minority admissions to be
not only appropriate, but commendable. However, despite my
agreement with SVA’s goals, it is its tactics that bother me.
By continuing its trend of overly aggressive demands, SVA turns a
possibly productive relationship between students and the
administration into an adversarial one. This also seems to hold
true for its relationship with the student body itself. Despite its
call for action, SVA seems to attack the exact same students it
asks for support if they disagree with any element of the
organization. This irony was made explicitly apparent in a letters
to the editor (SVA calls students to untie, hold admin.
accountable, 04/01/04)
. On one side of the section, SVA had
written a passionate letter to students in which it calls on the
student body to “raise its voices in demanding the University
listens.” However, this “call” for student
participation was immediately followed by a letter by SVA member
Clair Morrissey attacking the reputation of Dan Adams for
disagreeing with some of the group’s goals and platforms.
While Morrissey has every right to confront any aspects of
Adams’s article she felt were unfair or incorrect
(Liberals behaving badly, 03/31/04), her personal attacks on
Adams’s character were completely inappropriate and uncalled
for. She announces Adams’s disagreement with the tactics of a
University group is an underlying sign of Adams being
“sexist, racist and heterosexist.” I was appalled to
see someone seek to brand a person with such a vile, disgusting
reputation, based on an extremely broad and incorrect
interpretation of their ideas. Adams said nothing of marginalized
groups in society being considered such because of their
“impatience and inability to communicate with persons of
power.” His original article instead suggested that
marginalized organizations on campus could not accomplish their
goals because of their extreme tactics, a point only further
demonstrated by Morrisey’s response. Is this SVA’s
approach to any student who disagrees with the group’s chosen
tactics? Does Morissey fail to realize Adams himself is part of the
student body from whom her organization claims to ask for support?
Her response only showed me that while SVA wants the aid of
students’ voices, it seems to be completely opposed to
listening to them. I encourage SVA to take part in the same
productive dialogue it demands from administrators with students
who have minor disagreements with their organization. Perhaps then,
a united voice can be actually realized.

Joshua Sledge

Business junior


For women, abortion can be induced by emergency

To the Daily:

In an article (Fem Fair addresses issues of violence, choice,
the Daily quotes nurse-midwife Lisa Kane Lowe saying
“It is a common misconception that contraception is related
to abortion.” Lowe is incorrect. Hormonal contraceptives such
as the pill and emergency contraceptives especially can behave as
abortion-inducing drugs.

Emergency contraception, since it is taken after intercourse,
can only work if it either prevents conception or if it prevents a
fertilized egg from implanting in a woman’s uterus. If it
acts to prevent conception then the emergency contraceptive truly
works as a contraceptive. If the emergency contraceptive prevents
implantation of a fertilized egg (a birth-prevention mechanism that
it shares with the pill) then it does not act as a contraceptive;
it acts as an abortifacient. If you believe that life begins at
conception, preventing a newly conceived human life from implanting
in the womb is in fact a very early abortion.

Tom Bress

Undergraduate laboratory coordinator,

Mechanical engineering


Student needs to change perception of YAF, funding at

To the Daily:

I’d like to clear up some misconceptions made by Jeff
Rezmovic in his letter (Safe spaces at ‘U’ must be
maintained for students, 03/30/04)
. Rezmovic seems to think
it’s hypocritical for someone in a student group to criticize
outrageous funding to University offices and “extras”
that are unessential to the academic process. I don’t think
there is anything wrong with a student having concerns about why
his already high tuition is rising and why his money is going
toward these “extras” that don’t affect his or
her time here at the University. Look at it like this: There is a
big group of people that live in a large house. They each have to
pay a certain portion of the phone bill to stay in the house. A
couple of them never use the phone, but they are still forced to
pay their portion of the phone bill to stay in the house even as
the cost each has to pay for the phone bill keeps rising to
unbelievable amounts. I think there is a large group of students
here at the University that feel the same way as the people who
never use the phone in the house. For those like Rezmovic, who
don’t want the funding cut for the “extras,”
don’t try to force everyone else to pay for them, raise the
money yourselves. I’m also deeply offended by the way
Rezmovic stereotypes Young Americans for Freedom. He says we are
all “wealthy” and “Republican.” I am
actually a poor Libertarian from Kansas. This whole funding topic
is very pertinent to me because I am going to have trouble in the
next few years finding the funds to keep up with my rising
out-of-state tuition. When you complain about funding cuts to the
“extras” and try to argue that this University needs
the “extras,” you are trying to speak for every student
that pours money into the University’s funds, but I ask you:
Please don’t try to speak for me and my money.

P.S: Rezmovic, since I don’t think you know the meaning of
fascism, here it is: A political philosophy, movement, or regime
(as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above
the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic
government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and
social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. I
invite you to attend one of our YAF meetings to learn how we are
probably the student group that is most opposite of fascism there
is on campus.

Jeremy Fertner

Engineering freshman

Campus Director, YAF

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *