Questioning the policy
To the Editor:
I was very surprised to find your 12-page, full-color, glossy advertising insert "The Silent Epidemic" promoting the anti-abortion agenda of the Minnesota-based Human Life Alliance in the July 31st issue of The Summer Pennsylvanian. In the interest of transparency, could you clarify whether there are any sources of advertising that would be refused publication in the paper? For example, does the DP refuse advertising from brewers or cigarette companies?
If absolutely anyone can buy advertising in the DP, then fine: this is at least in the spirit of the First Amendment's protection of free speech, whether anyone likes it or not. However, if any advertising is refused as objectionable, then I am deeply troubled by the DP's implicit endorsement of your advertiser's anti-abortion position.
Tristan Mabry Political Science Ph.D. candidate
Battling the wrong people
To the Editor:
Last week, student organizers opposing the military's recruiting policies that famously exclude gays from serving openly in uniform put together a panel discussion at the Law School featuring several Law faculty. In a remarkable display of diversity, every faculty participant argued against the military's policy.
I was disappointed, though not surprised, to hear afterwards that the organizers could not locate a single faculty member who would champion the military's position. The reality is that after three years at Penn Law, I cannot name a single faculty member (and there are over 50) who would espouse socially conservative views at a public forum.
On Monday, about 100 primarily law students turned out on Locust Walk for a protest of the military's recruiting policies. I was stunned by the large turnout for two reasons. First, I was never aware of a gay or lesbian student at Penn Law who wished to take a 70 percent paycut over the private sector and serve their country for four or more years. In three years, I met only two students with any interest in joining the JAG Department. One of them was accepted into Air Force JAG and the other was unable to complete Marine Corps boot camp because he fell ill.
Why 100 protesters decided to protest a policy that does not directly or indirectly affect a single one of them is beyond my comprehension. In addition, the protest appeared to be aimed at the recruiter who was interviewing on campus that day. News flash: your Congressman created these policies. Lobbying the recruiter is like asking a barnacle to turn the ship around.
Joseph Lucas Law '03
