LETTERS: Community is key to library

To the Editor: To be frank, both the library and the University have, in the past, taken turns ignoring the wishes of the community. The opposition in 1990 to the plan to move the library across the street to a new home was due as much to the fact that the community was shut out of the process as it was to the plan itself. It seems that we are at a point where Penn is (once again) realizing what a valuable asset this community is and is understanding the value of involving the community in decisions which affect us as much as they affect Penn. We greatly appreciate this approach and would like the library decision-making process to follow suit and value our thoughts as well. I must also respond to several other points in your editorial. The community is not suggesting that the city, or that Penn, whip out a checkbook and hand the library $3.8 million. Rather, we ask that there be a commitment made to save this building, so that we can reasonably look for other sources of funding. Without a definite commitment to save the building, we cannot approach donors for cash. I must also disagree with the description of the building as an "institution-like metal and glass structure." The 1959 renovations to the building were unfortunate, but the building, and the site, still retain enough historical significance and beauty to make saving them worthwhile. Katherine Dowdell Board Member, University City Historical Society Obeying the liquor law To the Editor: I read with interest your article headlined "Intl. students get 'Mad' over ID incident" (The Daily Pennsylvanian, 9/21/98). While the article accurately states that our policy is to be assured of the legal drinking age of customers before serving them alcohol, I do take some issue with it. It is not a matter of arbitrary Mad Mex policy to decline to honor some international identification. According to Pennsylvania law, an ID must be one of four allowable types. The laws are clear. While we regret not being able to accommodate each and every customer's request, it's unreasonable to blame the restaurant, which is only abiding by the law. Furthermore, Mr. Braxton, our manager, has attempted to help international students who face a challenge buying an alcoholic drink. Braxton offered services above and-beyond the legal requirements, offering to keep photocopies of passports on his premises to facilitate the customers being served alcohol. Not one individual has taken advantage of his generous offer. It would surely do your readers a better service to inform them that international students may need more than their international ID to be served; suggest that they carry their passports with them if they intend to purchase alcohol. Rebuking an institution because they abide by the law is unfair and a self-serving way to sensationalize a difficult issue. If Mad Mex were to disregard the law and serve customers based on invalid (according to the law, not us) identification, we would not be in business for long. The article details some six restaurants who practice similarly strict guidelines, yet our name appears in the headline both on the front page of the paper and on the corresponding continuation headline. How is it fair and impartial coverage to detail policy from six establishments and the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, only to name one in the headline? We make no apologies for following the law. We do regret if in abiding by the law some customers do not receive what they would like. Unfortunately, we can not rewrite the law in order to serve our own needs, or even the needs of those who visit our restaurant while in this country from abroad. Tom Baron President, Mad Mex Pregnancy prevention To the Editor: Stephanie Cooperman writes about unwanted pregnancies at college ("Opening doors to understanding, DP, 10/28/98) and "Dr. Ruth" Westheimer says, "There is nothing more interesting than talking about sex" ("'Dr. Ruth' talks sex at U. bookstore," DP, 10/28/98). What a funny way our society confuses the concerns surrounding human sexuality. In the same issue, a pop culture magazine raves about the top 10 ways of achieving orgasm while lamenting the silence surrounding rape. Our television programs are known for their shameless sex-based comedy, while we push sex aside as another meaningless aspect of life. Our society's slogan could be: "Sex -- it just happens." Now amidst all this confusion, we come up with different, "close to 100 percent effective," answers. I am overjoyed to tell you there is another way that is proven -- logically, physically and emotionally -- to consider sex: abstain. If you wait for your spouse, you don't have to worry about sexually transmitted diseases, completely unplanned-for pregnancies, emotional upheaval, one-night mistakes, that you're being compared to someone else, that you're a notch on a bedpost or that your partner is not committed. And the list goes on. But, you say, "It's not realistic, and sex is expected." All you have to do to make it realistic is not do it. All you have to do to make it unexpected is voice your standard. Let's be perfectly clear: Love does not equal sex, or else we'd see more marriages at strip clubs. Sex is an expression of love. If you want love you can trust, wait for the commitment that comes with a ring. Those who wait have something wonderful to look forward to on the first night of the rest of their lives. Those who don't wait? well, it's just another ho-hum kinda night. And if you've not waited, it doesn't mean you can't stop and start over. I want to close by giving full credit to the author of this solution. By all means, it makes so much sense, it's funny that we couldn't have thought it up ourselves. This solution comes from a well-known source, the Holy Bible, where you'll find the One who actually created sex. Pretty amazing how He thinks of these things way ahead of time to protect us from ourselves. Check it out; you might be surprised. Marc Aneed College '99