LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: A UA Constitutional Question

To the Editor: However, even if the budget committee did have the authority to audit SAC groups, the way Schorr has handled this affair should prevent him from being further involved. The DP reported all the various problems with the way that Schorr handled the proposed audit, including the fact that he gave no notice of it to anyone. Finally, he offers no basis for his audit. He claims that he has "heard rumors" about the International Affairs Association, yet provides no evidence of these rumors. He fails to provide a source of any of these rumors, or even an example. If Schorr is unwilling to present the issues of this audit publicly, then why should anyone take him seriously. If Schorr does have a complaint about the International Affairs Association, then he should give the board of the Association a chance to respond, rather than flexing his pseudo-political muscles of or the issue. In that vein, as a member of the board of the International Affairs Association, I challenge Schorr to stand up for what he claims to believe. This is an open challenge for him to debate me in the public forum of his choosing, including on "Frontline" on UTV, since he has already made one appearance there, about the potential issues of this audit. Both the questions of the constitutionality of the audit, and the possible ulterior motives that Schorr may have can be discussed for all to see, and, in the end, the public will see that there is no basis, either constitutionally or causally, that necessitates an audit of the International Affairs Association. Joshua Wolson Secretary-General Ivy League Model UN Conference College '96 Car Alarm To the Editor: As a student with a car located on campus, I wish to express my anger with the insufficient security as evidenced by "Crime Reports" in The Daily Pennsylvanian. (Approximately 50 cars have been burglarized during the month of September; at this rate, it will be nearly 500 cars by the end of the academic year.) No doubt, car burglaries have been rampant; yet I have seen or heard of no measures to counteract this increasing and pervasive epidemic. I would assume that parking in a University-affiliated lot should reduce the occurrence of burglaries. Perhaps my assumption is incorrect. Clearly, the University has a duty of care. It appears as if your office has a decision to make. If you decide to run a safe parking facility, you have an obligation to correct the breakdown in security. On the other hand, if you make the decision to run a parking lot with inadequate protection -- the current condition -- you must clearly tell the students, your customers, that the lot is not secure. Simple math tells me that your revenue for lot 14 is well over $150,000. (This is a large sum of money for running an ineffective parking garage). In sum, the University is providing a false sense of security to car owners--your metal gates do not scare away thieves. There has been no communication between you and your customers. At the minimum, the University should contact those students with cars and indicate the steps being taken to remedy the problem. Burying your head in the sand will not suffice. Shara Arnofsky Engineering '97 Courageous Columnist To the Editor: I commend Sonja Stumacher in her courage to say to an overly eager religious Christian, "I'm not interested, thank you," and, finally after being pestered, to ask him to please leave. ("A Religious Experience," DP 10/11/95) I chuckled over her assessment that this person looked like someone "who has a lot to say but little to learn." Unfortunately for us all, people who find themselves overwhelmed with new insights into their lives make themselves a real bore by insisting that we all listen to it and many then make the absurd requirement that everyone have the same experience. However, did it occur to Sonja that this person may have been recruiting for a cult? There are several groups at Penn who can be defined as cults. These groups are never upfront and honest about many aspects of their organization. Thus, membership occurs by uninformed consent. One Penn student who is an ex-member told me, "I was never told at the beginning everything about the group before I joined. It came out only a small piece at a time." After the student got outside information about the history of the group and its tactics, he made the wise decision to leave. But not without cost, personal and emotional. Sonja chose to "just say no" and saved herself a lot of trouble. Another equally valid tactic is to ask lots of questions, both from those in the group, as well as from former members, other Christians, pastors and religious scholars. Unfortunately there are always gullible Penn students who listen only to the rhetoric of the group and join out of ignorance. Remember, cults are deceptive and therein lies their power. Beverly Dale Executive Director Christian Association The Necessary Requirement To the Editor: If Penn eliminates its foreign language requirement and allots more time to English, as Mike Nadel suggested in his column "The Foreign Language Dilemma" (DP, 10/10/95), "communication disorders" will not be "cured." Rather, the University will waste time teaching principles of the English language that should have been taught -- and learned -- in grade school and high school. If Penn is admitting students native speakers of English who are not yet proficient after 12-plus years of schooling, then this university has bigger problems than a foreign language requirement. As for the foreign language requirement itself: Mike Nadel sounds as if he needs it more than most. As students who have been through a good foreign language curriculum can report, instruction in a foreign language does not, as Nadel suggests, simply enable students to say in French "I know the meal will be very annoying. My brother will play with his peas," using the wrong verb tense. Foreign languages, if taught well to students with open minds, offer lessons about the culture and history of other countries. And, often, the etymology of words in the English language can be traced to the older, and often gentler and more concise, words of other lands; knowledge of such roots can enhance the student's use of the English language. As for the "proficiency" issue, perhaps Penn's definition of "proficiency" in a foreign language includes not only room for the skilled speaking, reading, and writing of that language, but an understanding of the culture (or cultures) using that language. And even if that isn't Penn's definition, Nadel should remember that "proficient" is not a synonym for "fluent." Nadel admitted his idea to abolish the foreign language requirement in favor of "a new devotion to English" was "probably" ethnocentric. He put it mildly. To his proposal to cut Penn's foreign language requirement, I reply: Quel horreur! Jennifer Baldino Penn Health Magazine Assistant Editor