LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Reaction to ad insert continues

To the editor: Michael Gold heroically claims that he, like Voltaire, "will defend to my death the right for people to express their opinions." However, he is "personally offended" that these opinions were printed without an accompanying pro-choice viewpoint. He argues that the DP should not have published the paid advertisement that the insert represents because it is "one-sided propaganda." The insert was in fact, one-sided, but if the DP were to follow Gold's directions no works of opinion could ever be printed without a rebuttal. Not only would advertisements suffer, but Gold's own letter (a good example of a one-sided work) could not have been published. His policy would cripple the very exchange of free ideas that he -- a self-proclaimed defender of free speech -- should support?. As for Erik Oliver, I was surprised and disappointed that a Law student would show such ignorance. In likening pro-lifers to Holocaust revisionists and comparing the supplement to an ad on "how oil drilling is good for the environment," Oliver shows that he has neither thought about abortion nor talked with anyone who has. Abortion is perhaps the most troubling ethical and moral issue of our day; both positions can be logically defend and both lead to uncomfortable ethical compromises. For anyone who thoughtfully examines the issue, while conclusions may be reached, no easy answers exist. One may argue his or her position (as the insert did), but one cannot dismiss the other side completely?. Albert DiMeo Medicine '98 n To the Editor: As a member of the University community and as a woman, I was outraged at the supplement accompanying the February 27 Daily Pennsylvanian. I feel the pro-life advertisement presented only one side of a very sensitive issue. While the issue is an important one, and I strongly advocate freedom of speech, I found the manner in which the advertisement was presented to be both offensive and irresponsible. The advertisement was published in a newspaper read by many impressionable young women. Including such emotional, one-sided material only encourages vulnerable women to make uninformed decisions that may not be in their best interests. Also, the inclusion of such graphically pro-life material -- which goes so far as to condemn abortion for victims of rape and incest -- is insensitive towards women who have had to struggle personally with these issues. This "advertisement," better named propaganda, is outwardly offensive to women who may have opted for abortion, or who went through with pregnancy and are living with regrets. This publication sets a dangerous precedent, opening the door for any extreme political group to evangelize one-sided views in our student newspaper. Rachel Mann College '98 Bryant should go academic To the Editor: As a Lower Merion High School alumnus, I feel it's my duty to correct a few things written by Jordan Smith in his commentary ("Bryant puts on a show," DP, 2/28/96). First of all, Lower Merion is a western suburb of Philadelphia, not a northern suburb. Second, I don't think it's fair to characterize the players on Lower Merion's hoops team (excluding Kobe Bryant) as "decidedly mediocre." Maybe Smith needs to check the box score, but Emory Dabney and Dan Pangrazio both had solid games at the Palestra, and have had fine seasons this year for the Aces. Also, from the tone of his commentary, it appears that Smith agrees with Temple Coach John Chaney, that Bryant should attend LaSalle University. I heartily disagree with Chaney. While I've grown up attending Big 5 basketball games at the Palestra, and I think it's one of the truly great college basketball traditions in the country, I don't feel Bryant's best interests will be served by attending LaSalle. Bryant is one of those rare players who is a legitimate NBA prospect. The best thing he can do for himself is go to a top-notch college, both academically and athletically. I believe he's narrowed his other college choices down to North Carolina, Duke and Michigan. All three fill the bill. At any of these schools, Bryant will get a high-quality education while competing against some of the top collegiate basketball players in the country. Attending LaSalle, while greatly helping Philly hoops, would just not give Bryant the same kind of competitive exposure or media attention -- both of which are important to any NBA prospect. Rand Sacks Law '96 Integrity and responsibility To the Editor: In Lisa Levenson's column "Petitions and priorities" (DP, 2/26/96) she claims that signing a petition "would compromise [her] journalistic objectivity." Let us set aside for a moment the fact that she is writing an Opinion Page column, where objectivity is not expected (and certainly not offered). I'd like to address another issue, one that seems to naturally arise from such a statement. Does the media really think that their duty to not have opinions means that they are expected not to think? If this is the case, Levenson has heinously misinterpreted the term objectivity to mean having no thought, as opposed to no opinion. If all of the media is under this impression, we could all call the media a bunch of morons and get on with our lives. The problem arises when these morons offer their opinion as news, as fact, as truth. This is what happens in today's American society. The DP is a prime example. Every fraternity or sorority story starts with the Greek being the "bad guy" and the non-Greek (be it a person, the University, Sfuzzi or Judith Rodin) being the innocent bystander. The entire IAA budget issue turned out to be a non-story, but it stayed in the "news" for weeks. It proved to be, like dozens of other stories we've read over the past four years, nothing but a DP-driven waste of time. Journalistic objectivity, even when properly practiced, is useless without journalistic integrity and journalistic responsibility. Josh Raha Engineering '96 Mike Kasdan Engineering '96 PAC will miss Theatre To the Editor: I am writing in response to the article "Students upset over loss of theater" (DP, 2/9/96), in which Penn Speech Team President Paul Higday was quoted saying, in reference to the closing of the Annenberg School Theatre, "In fact, it's probably the least used theater in the Annenberg complex. If Annenberg had to lose a theater, this was the best one." The Annenberg School Theatre is the most-used performance space in the Annenberg Complex. It is used by a wide variety of student performing arts groups because it is the most ideal proscenium theater on campus. Proscenium theaters are the most adaptable theaters for performance, especially dance, for which the other two proscenium theaters on campus, Houston Hall and the Studio Theater in the Annenberg Center, are not suitable. (The Zellerbach Theater is also a proscenium, but it is too large and too expensive for most student groups.) Some of the groups that regularly use the Annenberg School Theatre are African Rhythms, Penn Dance, Penn Singers, COUP, Glee Club and Quadramics. Not only is the loss of the Annenberg School Theatre taking away the best space on campus for these groups to perform, but it is also increasing the demands for other performance spaces on campus which are already nearly always filled. In addition, although the church at 40th and Walnut streets has been slated for student performing arts needs, it is not yet available for rehearsals or performances. There are currently no plans for its renovation into a viable performance space and, even after renovations, it would fulfill very different performance needs than the Annenberg School Theatre. Katherine Minarik Performing Arts Council Chairperson College '98 Crystal's insights important To the Editor: I wanted to applaud Dave Crystal on his efforts to discuss race, social issues and academic quality in his columns ("Social construction," DP, 2/1/96 and "The ties that bind," DP, 2/15/96). Crystal represents a refreshing change from the typical DP columnists who tend to shy away from difficult issues that impact our school and society. In an effort to address the many issues and experiences, Crystal may have not spent enough time clarifying certain issues, hence the resulting confusion of some of his detractors. First, Crystal's most important contribution was the stimulation of debate. All too often I have seen fellow classmates merely attend class and write down every word spoken by the professor. Many students absorb the material as presented and merely recycle this information in the form of examinations and papers. Crystal, however, performed the most important task of a student -- to think! The purpose of an education is to give students the ability to consider new ideas and to fundamentally evaluate the information given to them. Challenging the course material is even more important in a subject area like Sociology. Unlike a hard science where you can prove your answer, the soft sciences are highly subjective. Second, I was highly disappointed in the nature of the criticism channeled toward Crystal. Instead of responding with the sound academic logic expected of Ivy League students, Crystal has been attacked on a personal level. How can we respect the intellectual vigor of this university when a professor's wife, with degrees in Sociology and Anthropology, called Crystal a "silly ninny" ("Kudos, catcalls for Crystal's view of race," DP, Letters to the Editor, 2/16/96)? Is that the best Ben Franklin's university can do? If we could instead discuss race in an adult fashion, possibly we could bridge the gap of misunderstanding that is so apparent. Finally, there is the issue of the nature of race itself. To claim that "all race is socially constructed" is ignoring some fundamentals of science. There are some biological differences within humanity as a whole. Crystal used this notion to support the notion for true equality under the law. He is obviously against any form of discrimination based on race, even if under the guise of helping a particular racial group. Crystal has attempted to use his column to address important issues that impact our society. However, I was particularly disappointed at the content of the responses he received. To quote a strident supporter of liberty, equality and individual rights, F. A. Hayek, "...biology, with variability as its cornerstone, confers on every human individual a unique set of attributes which give him a dignity he could not otherwise possess...If the differences are not very important, then freedom is not very important and the idea of individual worth is not very important." Steven Ebert College '96