LETTERS: The source of alcohol-related hospitalizations

To the Editor: Taken literally, Belinfante's quote is true. That, however, is not what he implied. Yes, it is true that Hill sent more people to the hospital. But it is equally if not more likely that it was the Greek system that caused these people to be sent to the hospital. I know this because I was directly involved in taking one of the students to the hospital and his drinking had occurred outside of Hill and he consequentially had to be dragged to his room. Another student was also taken to the emergency room after a night at a Greek house. I personally don't have a stance on the alcohol banning issue. If anything, I lean more towards not banning alcohol. But if the Council's decision was made because Hill cared enough to send these people to the hospital, they had better re-evaluate their decision. Phil Yoon College '00 Worried about vendors To the Editor: Regarding the recent proposal for a food market on 40th street ("U. City may get cinema, food market," DP, 2/18/98) I would like to note that it could all be in vain. Why? Because the addition of a food market will be completely worthless when compared to the prospect of losing the food vendors all over campus. I faced the prospect of almost no food selection Friday when the vendors protested to illustrate the effects of the administration's desire to curtail food vending on campus. Food vendors offer lunches for very reasonable prices and lower the average student's cost of living over the duration of the semester. Bottom line: if the vendors are forced to leave, this campus will truly suck. Harold Lee College '00 The normality of Penn To the Editor: Ben Dietz's column "Polarities of undergrad education," (DP, 2/13/98) got me thinking about Penn and its culture. While I lack the experience/ erudition of a sociological or historical scholar, I do believe that Dietz's piece totally missed one thing: The normalness of most students. And, although I don't think I know of another cultural spectator who has so captured the lives of Penn's hard core fraternity-sorority scene (many years of "Style on the Street" probably helped hone his skills), I think Dietz has missed the other 95 percent of our school. Despite the stereotypes and popular beliefs, most Penn students aren't drinking themselves silly or working themselves to death. Rather, they do normal things like watch movies, read and study. The highlighting of Penn's weirdos necessarily makes the normal kids feel out of place or, even worse, like they are missing out on something. As last week's "Streetwise" said, "only 2 percent of students will ever make in into this column." What it neglected to say, however, is that only only slightly more students actually read the column. Therefore, if you are one of the few that actually gives a hoot, you have a pretty good chance of making the "red hot spotlight." Dietz's commentary also reminded me of some articles I have seen on sex in America. The prevailing belief that "everyone is having lots of sex," is something thoroughly ingrained in our culture. Fortunately, (or unfortunately, depending on your perspective), the amount of sex taking place is significantly less than popular culture would have you believe. The same holds true for Penn's drinking. Everyone thinks everyone else is partying and drinking all the time. It might even be interesting to investigate the lives of a few normal Penn students. Instead of tales of drinking stupors and non stop studying, one would probably find kids hanging with their friends, watching movies and studying. And, I think this study might allay the fears of many students who think they are missing out. So, to those of you who don't get hungover each night and don't take three tests each day, chill out. This place is pretty awesome, and, not following the lives Dietz profiles is the first step in exploring everything Penn has to offer. To paraphrase our late ex President Nixon, it's time for the silent majority to open its mouth. Michael Bressler Wharton and Engineering '99 Red and Blue managing editor Recontextualizing To the Editor: While Roger Geissler presumes that I am not a student of the Bible and haven't read it for its context in its entirety ("Same-sex marriage condemnation misses context," DP, 2/20/98) he does not know me nor Aneed nor the Bible for that matter. When writing my first letter I thought of numerous verses in the Bible, placed there by God, for our instruction and guidance. It is clear in the basic account of creation in the book of Genesis that God created woman from man so that man might not be lonely. Man and woman's natural function (Romans 1:25-27) is to marry each other not only for reproductive reasons but to be each other's life partner. To suggest that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality is against sound teaching (I Timothy 1:9-10, I Corinthians 6:9-10 and Genesis 19). I must make a distinction for Geissler, as I believe he is the one who doesn't see the Bible in its entirety. There is a major difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament teaches an 'eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth' while the New Testament teaches us forgiveness. It is because of this ultimate and perfect sacrifice for our sins that the New Testament teaches us forgiveness. According to the Bible homosexuality is something God hates just like premarital sex, lying, stealing, murdering, adultery, etc. We, as humans, however, cannot live perfect and holy as Jesus did on this earth. And without Jesus in our lives we cannot escape the fiery pit of Hell. God desires for us to call upon the name of Jesus so that we may have a relationship with Him. He loves us, He really does, but at the same time He is God and cannot accept sin. So He sent us Jesus whose blood can wash us clean, if we only ask! Patrick Thomas Altman Wharton '00