LETTERS: Monday, November 8, 1999

A true minority Fiore questions the differences between Asian-American students and other students of different backgrounds. There is a fundamental difference between being of a different ethnicity or race and being from a different geographic region or political standpoint that did not even begin to be addressed by Fiore. Also, it does not make sense to question the status of Asian Americans as minorities, whether nationally or at Penn. Although 25 percent of this university consists of students of Asian descent, only 3 percent of the population of the United States is of Asian descent. If this does not constitute a "minority," then I am not sure what does. Although Fiore asks legitimate questions of the purpose, need and issues behind an Asian-American resource center, I would like to remind him and your readers that answers to his questions were clearly stated in both DP articles written about this issue early last week. Anyone who is interested should take the time to reread the information in the DP archives, learn about the history of Asian-American students on campus and speak to some members of the Asian-American community. Only then can one claim to claim to be a "fair-minded outsider." Jennifer Wound College '01 Vice Chairperson Asian Pacific Student Coalition Resource center now I would like to make a few clarifications to Mark Fiore's assertions in his most recent column. Most Asian-American students are immigrants themselves or the children of immigrants who have come to America since the Immigration Act of 1965. Therefore, there are issues and concerns that are unique to the Asian-American community. Furthermore, Asian Americans make up only 3.8 percent of this country's population. Does this not constitute a minority community? Moreover, Fiore's argument that the creation of a resource center would "funnel away funds that could otherwise be used to attract those professors" is unwarranted. Increased coverage of this issue has caught the attention of both alumni and parents who have expressed interest in making donations. Whose funds are we taking? Also, there are hundreds of events and activities held by hundreds of campus organizations, from the Penn Players to the College Republicans. Why is it that whenever people of color get together to do anything, it's automatically singled out as exclusionary or self-segregating? Hoa Duong College '01 Chairperson Asian Pacific Student Coalition Protecting the mail To the Editor: Please render payment of $18.23 as compensation for the three breakfasts that have been utterly spoiled this year as a result of the three disgusting columns by Josh "Let's dump the Nursing School" Callahan, Mark "Affirmative-shmirmative action" Fiore and now Michael "Life is not a fundamental human right" Feng ("It's the law: I'm an only child," DP, 11/5/99). Mr. Feng, maybe you cannot imagine the taste of regurgitated scrapple and eggs induced by phrases such as "What many Westerners regard as a fundamental human right must cede to harsh reality." Son, thousands of brave men and women died in our Civil War and were battered in the streets of Birmingham because they refused to believe that freedom, equality and the right to vote must cede to the "harsh reality" of racism. Then there are the thousands of brave Americans who gave the supreme sacrifice in Vietnam so that people would not have to suffer under the "harsh reality" of communism. Presently we are fighting the latest battle in the civil rights movement as people passionately seek a universal right to a decent education for America's children. And we seem to have made good progress since the days when women had to forego the pursuit of their dreams because of the "harsh reality" that "it's a man's world." Bill Cook College '00 Protecting the mail To the Editor: The moral equation of family self-determination and reproductive rights to dormitory overcrowding and national sovereignty in determining a country's immigration law in Michael Feng's column is both misguided and troubling. America, as well as China and every other sovereign country, has the right to determine the extent of legal immigration within its society. American citizens have the right to determine which rules they wish to govern their society by, subject to certain moral constraints due to our status as human beings. It is those fundamental rights, which includes the choice of determining the nature of one's own family, that transcends the rights of the sovereign and demonstrates the immorality of the Chinese one-child per family policy. While China may be economically better off with the one-child policy, my problem with the law lies in its intrusive method of implementation. If China wished to provide tax or other economic incentives to reduce the population burdens on its society, then that would be fine. However, by regulating children to the status of "legal nonentities" the Chinese government is abusing its power and preventing families from determining their composition. Since reproduction and family composition represent fundamental human rights that are conferred onto all people because of our humanity, I am exercising another fundamental right of mine and voicing my objection to this disgusting law which truly shocks the conscience and insults individuals around the world. Steven Ebert Law '00 Fels '98 College '96