Letters to the Editor

>Vote with your fork

I agree wholeheartedly with Tim Culverhouse's opinion in Monday's letter "Think of the farmers." We should act on the rampant injustices toward humans in the world. But his belief that doing so is at odds with farm animal welfare is totally misguided and misinformed.

Farmers don't want to inflict cruelties on their animals, but they do so to stay competitive. When we pay a tiny bit more for our food, farmers can afford to provide their animals with a better quality of life.

Frankly, I don't know any other causes besides farm animal welfare that you can take a stand on three times a day at little cost to yourself and at no expense to the other injustices you fight with your time. Vote with your fork!

Jason Ketola

University alumnus

Sexism and immaturity

I would like to express my profound agreement with Quynh Nguyen's article in the Friday issue. It was refreshing to see that the "Get it Daily" ad she referred to was not in the paper for once. It is disgusting and it needs to go. This ad has bothered me for a long time and I am so glad that Nguyen had the guts to bring the issue out. It's hard to believe that at a school whose mantra is equality, acceptance and diversity, you would find sexism right in the school's newspaper. Our vice president is a Mexican-American, lesbian (which is fantastic to see her in a position of power!), and the Daily is still portraying skinny, tan blondes with big chests as the ideal?! Be progressive, not oppressive, and follow your school's lead in embracing diversity, questioning gender norms and stereotypes.

In response to Hoff's "Bike helmets are sexy" article, I would like to scold him for his insensitivity to the differently abled population. He says that bike helmets would make him "look like a dork" and then "look like I should be belted securely into the far front seat of a short bus." There are many students who do need special transportation to get to school and I don't think Hoff should be making discriminatory comments about them.

Our school prides itself on embracing diversity and breaking down stereotypes. We take pride in our vast differences based on gender, sexual orientation, age, religion and ability. Hoff needs to grow up; it's cruel to take cheap shots at people based on the ability that they were been born with. Hoff usually has creative, highly entertaining articles that I always look forward to reading, but he should not value a few immature laughs over other people's feelings. In the future, Hoff, I'd like to see you valuing respect.

Skyler Johnson

University undergraduate

Blame Pawlenty, not Hatch

Several recent letters have criticized Mike Hatch for fulfilling his duty to defend the constitutionality of the Minnesota Violent Game Act. Specifically, some have criticized Hatch's decision to appeal a federal judge's decision that the act violated the First Amendment. This decision was based in part on the judge's conclusion that the state could not show violent video games that "cause even the slightest injury to children." I applaud Hatch for challenging the judge's conclusion, but others apparently disagree.

Those who criticize Hatch's appeal argue that the video game legislation is obviously unconstitutional. One letter asserted that defending the constitutionality of the legislation amounts to "wasting people's time and money." Even if we assume this legislation is obviously unconstitutional, why has no one criticized Gov. Tim Pawlenty for signing the legislation and thus forcing the attorney general to waste "people's time and money"? In fact, Pawlenty bears more blame than Hatch for "wasting people's time and money." Hatch's job is to defend legislation against constitutional challenges. Pawlenty's job is to determine which pieces of legislation he should sign and thereby subject to constitutional scrutiny. If the legislation is obviously unconstitutional, then Pawlenty's decision to sign the act amounts to "wasting people's time and money." Rather than blame Hatch for doing his job, why not blame the man who originally signed the legislation into law?

Michael Everson

law student

Investigation needed

I am in full agreement with the letters in Thursday's Daily that called for an end to the war in Iraq and opposed any military venture in Iran. I do believe, however, that we should be cautious in our remarks about who is responsible for what happened in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.

There has been much secrecy about 9/11 and George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and Philip Zelikow (executive director of the 9/11 Commission that published the thoroughly unsatisfactory 9/11 Commission Report in 2004), along with many others, have done all they can to discourage a serious investigation. We really do not know exactly who was complicit in the events of 9/11 or to what extent.

Millions of Americans join the 9/11 truth movement in asking for an impartial inquiry, probably beginning in the press and eventually becoming a fully funded congressional investigation.

John Simcox

University alumnus