Dear Editor: ÿ I have some comments on the editorial by Jacquelyn Puente on Oct. 27:
1. Puente has painted Margaret Cho's performance in the worst colors. Since I wasn't there and didn't hear other evaluations, I have no way of knowing if these critiques were fair and accurate. I'd like to hear what a fair and impartial observer might say. If all of Puente's claims are true, aren't the organizers liable for a major investigation? Can those of us not in attendance get a transcript?
2. Puente's final comment doesn't seem to have any connection with the rest of her complaint. Did Bill Buckley really grace us with such "breathtaking rhetoric"? Incidentally, Puente needs to check out Catholic Church attendance in Western Europe. It's about as bad as Protestant attendance. They're all out jogging on Sunday morn. ÿ ÿMaurice Boyd Institute for Learning in Retirment
Dear Editor,
It is 1:37 a.m. as I write this letter. I am not up because I want to be or because I keep "college" hours. I am up because my room is too hot to sleep in. While the room is significantly cooler than the floor as a whole, or any part of the Letts-Anderson complex Dr. Hanson would care to visit, I cannot sleep with the window wide as it will go and a fan directly on me as I lay in bed.
I am very cognizant of the fact that we are in a heat wave. However, this is an ongoing problem, and the recent high temperatures are simply the straw that broke the camel's back. Summer and winter are not the only seasons in D.C. The central air keeps things warm as if it was already mid-December, and since the heating units were switched on several weeks ago the building has been horribly stifling. It's usually warm enough to put a sheen on resident's foreheads or doing something as leisurely as standing in the hall chatting. Keep in mind, many of the freshmen sleep three to a room, and windows can only be opened to a maximum of eight inches on account of the suicide bars, however many will move only three or four inches.
I have lived in Anderson Hall since last fall and have often found myself seriously uncomfortable as a result of the temperature in my living space. Last year the Anderson 3-N lounge was kept at eighty-five degrees for much of the spring, rendering it uninhabitable for anything more than the briefest and most necessary visits. As I write this, the doors to that lounge are propped open in an attempt to make it more comfortable because it's warmer than the hallways surrounding it. If staff and faculty were forced to live in these buildings, they wouldn't stand for it and would clamor for change.
I suggest the quickest and easiest solution would be to run the heat only from 6 p.m. to 7 a.m. in the first and last "cold" months. Another possibility would be to simply dial it all down a few degrees, and let the more sensitive residents pick up the slack with their room heaters or by putting on a sweatshirt. I implore you to please do something to change our conditions. One can always add another layer and put one more blanket on the bed, but going in the opposite direction, there's nothing you can do once you're naked.
Nicholas C. Short Sophomore SOC
Dear Editor,
The opinion written by Graham Gawryskiak has some misleading information in it that needs to be addressed by The Eagle. His comment, "while a condom is 99 percent effective, the actual rating drops to 84 percent when human error is taken into account. The pill is 97 percent effective," is completely false. The pill is 99 percent effective and the condom is only 97 percent effective. While Graham Gawryskiak may have mixed up his statistics, this may give your readers the wrong impression. While abstinence is the best way to protect oneself from pregnancy, it is proven that birth control pills are the next best way to protect oneself from pregnancy. I do agree with Graham Gawryskiak's stance on partial birth abortions and that it should be outlawed; however, I do have a pro-choice stance. I believe that if a mother's life is in jeopardy or the baby's or that the woman was raped, then an abortion is absolutely necessary if the mother chooses to.
I do not believe that abortion can be used as a form of birth control. If the mother was stupid enough to have sex and take all the risks that go along with it, then it is a result that the mother should live with. Partial-birth abortion is a cruel way of aborting a baby that is just about able to survive on its own. If the mother chooses to not want her baby in the last trimester (7-9 months), then the mother should then give it up for adoption.
Adrienne Bartlewitz Junior SPA/SOC
Dear Editors:
Heather Blanford's October 21 marriage commentary was both sad and disturbing. It is sad that Ms. Blanford would go to such great lengths to portray gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) as inherently different from and other than herself. There is as much diversity between and among GLBT people as in any other randomly-selected portion of the population. They are different from those in the heterosexual majority only in attraction and identity, but only because our society insists upon making distinctions on the basis of gender that are not all that important. It is disturbing that she sees GLBT people not only as very different but also as less deserving as the rest of the population. Ms. Blanford ignores the simple truth that there are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in all faith traditions and religious institutions through both birth and conversion. They are just as likely and qualified to hold leadership positions as anyone else. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people marry and are just as committed to their relationships and their partners as everyone else. Marriage is marriage, regardless of the genders, orientations, or identites of the married couple, and married gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans are just as entitled to the legal rights, benefits, protections, and responsibilities of marriage as anyone else.
Sincerely,
Barbara Lumond Purdom & Christopher Purdom Interfaith Working Group Coordinators http://www.iwgonline.org
