LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Crystal incenses readers again

To the Editor: While the DP wants to, and certainly should, promote diverse articles from the University community, this must be tempered with sensitive and sound editorial judgement. The DP would have censored such rabid rhetoric were it addressing, say, U.S. racial and minority relations. Likewise it must take similar action on Crystal's racist trash. James Phimister Engineering Graduate Student Editor's Note: Daily Pennsylvanian columnists are selected by the newspaper's Editorial Board at the start of each semester. These biweekly columnists have complete freedom in selecting their topics and their opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the board. n To the Editor: After reading Dave Crystal's column ("'Palestinian' heritage?," DP, 3/21/96), I became so incensed that I had to write in to point out the serious flaws in arguments he presented against Palestinian claims to land in the Middle East. It is obviously Crystal who is the "blot on the intellectual integrity of the Ivy League," not his detractors. I wonder if Crystal has objectively studied the region at all. The idea that Arabs have no historic claim to the land is ludicrous. Crystal apparently missed the fact that there has been an Arab presence there since the 7th Century B.C.E., and if being in a region for well over a thousand years offers one no claims to land, perhaps the boundaries of the entire world need to be redrawn. Why do Jews have more of a right to a country in the Middle East simply because their presence predates that of the Arabs? If this is the case, maybe Crystal should consider the country he lives in. He seems to have forgotten that the United States occupies territory formerly held by Native Americans. I personally would be delighted to see all the land returned to those who had it brutally taken from them. I also question Crystal's knowledge of the root of conflicts in the Middle East. If he had any idea of the rather shady diplomatic activities that led to the formation of Israel, he might have a better understanding of why Palestinians feel they deserve their own state. During World War I, Arabs in this region aided the British in the overthrow of the Ottoman Empire, which had control of the entire Arabian Peninsula at the time, under the assumption that a country would be established for the Palestinians. This idea came from the Husayn-McMahon correspondence of l915-16, more than a year before Great Britain considered creating a homeland for the Jews. The 1917 push for the State of Israel and its actual establishment in 1948 most likely left the Palestinians angered and betrayed. Though this in no way justifies the terrorist acts recently perpetrated, knowledge of the events leading up to the current situation is necessary if one hopes to rationally deal with this problem, instead of simply sinking down to the same level of violence. Crystal obviously has little clue as to the history of the Middle East and should do a bit more research before he reinforces his image as a fool once again?. While I may hold a rather negative view of Crystal, I must admit his column is the only one that I look forward to reading. Virtually all the others deal with non-issues and I am glad to see that at least one columnist has the guts to take a stand which will spark a debate and get people thinking. Even though I may think Crystal is somewhat of an ass, I do await his future columns. Matthew Roy College '98 Voting tie-in for tix wrong To the Editor: In an election, one of the more powerful statements a member of a community can make is a vote of abstention. One might abstain from voting because one is unaware of the issues or candidates being considered. One might abstain because one might disagree with the entire system, or simply because none of the alternatives being voted on are particularly appealing. In any case, it should be one's own decision whether or not to vote, just as one should be able to make one's own decision on who to vote for. Therefore, it is alarming that during next week's Undergraduate Assembly elections, those who vote will exclusively be offered tickets to a Connaissance event ("Billy Joel raffle combined with UA election," DP, 3/21/96). Such an incentive robs individuals of their right to abstention. It will also encourage many who are ignorant of candidates or issues to vote, solely in the interest of acquiring tickets. Finally, since Connaissance events are funded by the student body, everyone should have access to such tickets -- whether they vote or not. The Nominations and Elections Committee should take more care with such decisions. Robbing individuals of their right to abstain from elections destroys the sanctity of elections themselves. Raj Mittal CAS '98 Editor's Note: Only currently enrolled, full-time undergraduates must cast ballots to get wristbands to obtain raffle tickets for Connaissance's Billy Joel lecture next month. Ballots may be cast blank, however. Access policy assailed anew To the Editor: I went to a large undergraduate university with many specialized libraries scattered throughout the campus. I have never heard of segregating a particular library for a specialized type of student. Well, at Penn this is now a reality. The Biddle Law Library has closed its doors to all students except law students. Being a first-year dental student, I spend many long evenings in the library. That library used to be the law library. It is very close to my living quarters and is open later during the week to accommodate students. One reason I chose Penn Dental is because it is located on a university campus with supposedly free access to other university facilities. It now seems that professional and graduate students must seek another place to study. I can't wait to see the consequence this has on Penn when one of us gets mugged while walking through campus to another library at night. It seems that since we are part of a larger university, we should at least have the freedom to choose our own place to study. Considering that graduate and medical/dental students will be the future clients of many law students, it would be unwise to cause this break in our relationship -- not to mention that dental students pay the highest tuition of any graduate school on campus and don't even have the freedom to share a library with a fellow graduate school. Penn prides itself on being a school that inspires freedom of choice and exchange of ideas with fellow students; however, it denies us a place to study what we are taught and gain knowledge during our stay here. Andrew Shur Dental Student Homosexuality unnatural To the Editor: Members of the homosexual community likes to portray themselves as "just like everyone else" except in their sexual and emotional preferences (B-GLAD supplement, 3/19/96). I am against homosexuality, yet I am not homophobic, nor am I a "gay-basher." I also do not believe homosexuality should not be tolerated, or that homosexuals should be persecuted. I do not favor discrimination, I am not against same-sex parents raising a child if that is better for the child and I do not care if homosexuals marry. By all means, let homosexuals have the same rights as everyone else. However, unlike many who feel homosexuality is wrong, my opinion is not based on religion, morality or even nausea, but rather on nature -- homosexuality is simply not natural. The homosexual community expects heterosexuals to accept their homosexuality and believe they were somehow born that way, that their sexual preference is not wrong and thus it is right somehow. However, there is no scientific evidence that homosexuality is caused by any genetic defect, nor is there any explanation why the child of two heterosexual parents is a homosexual, even if a second child is not. While the genetic reason may simply be "yet to be discovered," this does not override the fact that there exist no other examples of homosexuality in nature. While I am willing to tolerate homosexuals and feel they deserve the same rights as every other citizen, I am tired of hearing them tell me that they are right. Just because the homosexual community is large does not mean it is in any way natural or right. While it may seem strange that I am against homosexuality yet willing to tolerate it, the reason is somple -- it is no different than tolerating other groups that espouse and practice ideas with which I do not agree. The only difference between homosexuals and other groups is that homosexuality blatantly violates the laws of nature, which are more respectable and moral than any law man will ever create. Steven Rubenstein Wharton '96 Rodin responded correctly To the Editor: In a Letter to the Editor in last Thursday's DP ("Taking crime seriously," DP, 3/21/96), J. Spencer Martin accused President Rodin of having "ignored" an unfortunate incident in which a gun was found in a car driven to campus by a former employee of the President's Office. I am scratching my head over this letter. A prompt investigation was conducted by the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Human Resources and the President's Office. President Rodin insisted that the investigation be given top priority. At the end of the investigation, the employee was discharged. "Ignored?" I would say the opposite. Stephen Schutt Chief of Staff, President's Office University Vice President Editor's Note: Martin's letter was received prior to spring break, before the employee in question, Donald Gaines, was discharged. University Police discovered the gun in Gaines's car when he was a University employee.