Diversity nonsense is getting out of hand
Regarding 'Admissions edge for LGBT applicants?' (Monday, Oct. 23, 2006):
This diversity nonsense is truly getting out of hand. To even consider giving a preference to lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender students is an absurdity. If the bizarro Admission Office wants sexual diversity on top of every other type of diversity, then let's hear a cry for bestiality, necrophilia, incest, sadism, etc. so that Princeton will no longer be accused of emulating Harvard's admissions office. We can just follow the course of Sodom and ultimately self-destruct.
Michael Scharf '64
Middlebury has no admissions policy for sexual orientation
Regarding 'Admissions edge for LGBT applicants?' (Monday, Oct. 23, 2006):
I want to clarify Middlebury College's admissions policy as described in your article. While Middlebury welcomes students from diverse backgrounds, it has no admissions policy related to sexual orientation. Middlebury accepts only those applicants who have demonstrated evidence that they will succeed at the college academically and who will make positive contributions to its undergraduate community.
Robert Clagett Dean of Admissions, Middlebury College
U-Store has problems but removing it won't solve the problems
Regarding 'U-Store may discontinue book sales' (Monday, Oct. 23, 2006):
If the Harvard/MIT Cooperative is an example of what a Princeton bookstore should be modeled after, "serving the needs of the local academic community and projecting an appropriate scholarly image," why is our cooperative being jettisoned for an outside private company?
The U-Store has its share of problems. For example, it needs to do a better job of informing the local academic community of how one can be elected to its board of trustees (I for one, cannot find the bylaws or procedures anywhere). Instead of applying pressure to improve the inner workings of the coop by enhancing its transparency and responsiveness to the local academic community, however, the administration has used its considerable leverage to obliterate a 100-year-old member-owned institution, quite literally throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Eugene Franco '08
Randy Moss: All of TO's drama but with only a fraction of his talent
Regarding 'Pwang's Picks' (Friday, Oct. 20, 2006):
Please, please, don't use Randy Moss as someone who runs his routes and plays hard. The man is infamous for giving up on routes, freelancing across the middle of the field and throwing his QB under a bus. He just does it on the field not off. He's all the drama of Terrell Owens with a fraction of the talent.
If you're going to make an example of a route runner that never gives up and always stays in a game, please pick a guy like Torry Holt or Marvin Harrison.
Robert Glasgow '07
Put Catholicism and Islam in perspective
Regarding 'Benedict XVI: Undoing past progress?' (Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2006):
I and many fellow Catholic alums were taken aback by Michael Mederios's column. Are we to believe that the people Mederios is defending are, in fact, of a sound state of mind? These extremists, who do not represent the vast majority of pious, peaceful and reverent Muslims, do fit the pope's description. They kill indiscriminately, seeking only to maximize body count with each suicide attack. Mederios would have us believe that a group responsible for killing a nun (who was, by the very nature of her calling, unarmed and nonviolent), simply because of the faith she possesses, is actually worthy of defense. These fundamentalists are responsible for "things only evil and inhuman." It is a shame that they claim to act in the name of God, when the rest of their Islamic brothers and sisters would never harm another simply for having a different set of beliefs. The Vatican does not need to issue an apology.
Pope Benedict's preferences with regard to how he personally chooses to say Mass are his prerogative. The pope has never ordered followers to mistreat women or murder those of other faiths and cultures. Let's put things in perspective. Mederios, your ignorance astounds me.
Sean McGowan '06
Tackling faculty obscurantism? Don't be ridiculous
Regarding 'On erudite vernacular, i.e. big words' (Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2006):
Well done, J.R. de Lara!
Now that they've successfully addressed student grade inflation, maybe Nancy, Shirley and David can tackle faculty obscurantism.
Or maybe not. Doing so could cost them Cornel West GS '80. In fact, it could drive Princeton's student-faculty ratio into the ground and drop Princeton out of the US News Top 100.
Terry Wintroub '69
Use politically neutral language for reporting
Regarding 'Court to rule soon on gay marriages' (Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2006):
The Daily Princetonian should be more cautious with its words, especially with regards to such a decisive issue. The 'Prince' writes, "Several legal scholars and political insiders expect the court — known to be among the more activist in the country on social issues and individual rights — to find that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry in the state." The term "activist" used in this context has for some time served as a political tool to cast doubt on the authority and legitimacy of the judicial branch, especially when it decides in favor of LGBT rights and reproductive rights. In an article not appearing on the opinion page, the 'Prince' ought to use politically neutral language.
Sara Viola '08
A poor attempt to excuse terrorism
Regarding 'Benedict XVI: Undoing past progress?' (Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2006):
Simply put, I was shocked to read Michael Medeiros' take on the comments of Pope Benedict XVI concerning Islam. Medeiros uses the word "egregious" to describe Benedict's quote as well as the lack of immediate and sincere apology. He apparently did not feel the need to describe the ensuing coldblooded murder of a Somalian nun or the declaration of Holy War as "egregious," however. It is attitudes like those of Medeiros that permit violence to continue to masquerade as a valid form of political expression in our society. Medeiros also asserts that this kind of reaction should have been foreseen and accounted for by the Vatican. So now the principle of free speech is something only to be exercised if there is an assurance that no one will be offended? Are violent threats and violent actions now acceptable ways to express dissent? Whether in the Middle East or in the hallowed halls of Columbia University, violence and intimidation have no place in political discourse. I was disheartened to see Medeiros attempt to excuse the terrorism exhibited by some while choosing to condemn the words of the pope.
Tim Prugar '06
Stop making petty comments about the religion of one billion
Regarding 'Benedict XVI: Undoing past progress?' (Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2006):
Michael Mederios' comments about the pope's recent speech delivered at the University of Regensburg displays a total disregard for context and the usual and appallingly acceptable derision and contempt for the Church. It is telling that Mederios wrote nothing about the speech itself and what it was about, because he probably read the controversial quotation in question in isolation and then went on to pass judgment in his ignorance, just like so many who condemned the speech. And if he did read the speech, his interpretation of the pope's intentions is even more egregiously incorrect. The pope delivered the speech at a university, and being an academic, the pope understands the very simple principle that quoting another's words does not imply endorsing them. Moreover, the pope made it clear that he did not agree with the Byzantine emperor he was quoting. For the sake of his Princeton career, I hope that Mederios also understands this basic principle.
If Mederios opposes the Church's belief in objective truth or other such doctrines, I would advise him to begin his philosophical and theological studies now in order for him to develop an informed opinion of the matter, but until he can defend himself intelligently, I would urge him to stop making petty and ultimately hurtful comments about a religion one billion people affiliate themselves with.
Unlike those Mederios chose to defend, I neither expect nor demand any apology for his exercise of free speech.
Luca Barone '10
Read More
Keep academic authority in human hands
Lily Halbert-AlexanderThe Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
The Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
What do we owe society for a Princeton education?
Jia Cheng ShenThe social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
The social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
Notes from a so-called enemy’s classroom
Jennifer JenningsIt wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.
It wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.