Column and editorial misguided by a confusion of facts
Regarding 'Opinion' (Monday, Feb. 12, 2007):
After reading the 'Prince' on Feb. 12, I was disappointed by the number of errors I found scattered throughout the Opinion page.
The first error was in the editorial, "Shop 'til you drop," where the board states that students cannot view syllabi of courses they are not registered in. This is not entirely true. Though students who are shopping and not enrolled in a class do not receive course emails, they do have access to the course's syllabus as posted on the Blackboard website. Under the courses tab, simply click on "Spring 2007" and — Voila! — the pages for different courses offered this semester are available to you.
Also, in his column, Michael Medeiros asks us to "consider the policy of bag-checking that is in effect at all campus libraries." There is not a bag-checker hired to sit and check bags at every campus library, as Medeiros suggests. One can simply visit — and leave — Stokes, Fine or Frick to disprove Medeiros' statement.
Lastly, I would like to address an error of logic. Medeiros concludes that because eating clubs were orderly in their pickups, the Public Safety officers accompanying them were superfluous. He ignored the fact that having a Public Safety officer following you will probably discourage you from breaking any rules. In noncollegiate life — as well as on campus — part of the benefit of police presence is the deterrent effect that patrols have on crime. To assume that a safe place will remain as safe and crime-free without police presence is an illogical assumption unsupported by evidence. Meghan Howard '08
Sports columns were devoid of humor and relevance
Regarding 'Sacrificing hoops for the greater good' (Tuesday, Feb. 13, 2007):
Stop the dueling columns. Most alums don't care, and I imagine few undergrads do. Penn is a very good school, and we should leave them alone. These columns are devoid of merit as pieces of humor or as sports columns. If The Daily Princetonian's sports editors have this much free time on their hands, they should try and work their way toward the top of the Malkiel curve.
Seriously, guys. Nobody cares. Zachary Goldstein '05
The reaction to Silver's letter was extreme and unnecessary
Regarding'Letters to the Editor' (Tuesday, Feb. 13, 2007):
Joyce, Girgis, McGowan, Anderson and Fragoso suggested in their letters that I misrepresented the views of politics professor Robert George. The sole view that I attributed to Professor George is his claim that intentional human male ejaculation is moral only when it occurs within the vagina of a woman to whom he is married. Professor George has consistently confirmed this belief, in graphic terms, in his many writings on sexual behavior. He disapproves of "anal or oral intercourse between persons of opposite sexes (even if married), if it is intended to bring about complete sexual satisfaction apart from penile-vaginal intercourse" from "In Defense of Natural Law." He also disapproves of a hypothetical marital situation in which "Susan, for example, masturbates John to orgasm or applies oral stimulation to him to bring him to orgasm." Actually, however, my previous letter did not describe the full extent of Professor George's claims: sexual intercourse between husband and wife is still immoral, according to George, if "couples are engaging in the activity simply as a means of having (and giving each other) a pleasurable experience." Why is this wrong? According to George, it doesn't allow a husband and wife to "literally become 'one flesh.' " The phrase "one flesh" has no meaning in modern-day secular discourse. It describes a religious concept that traces back to the Bible.
Professor George has challenged my views on this issue and others in (often less-than-civil) writings. But he has turned down all previous requests from student organizations to participate in a debate with either me or Professor Peter Singer, who has critiqued George's moral views from a bioethical perspective. This is unfortunate because contending claims are best evaluated when contenders engage each other directly in a give-and-take format. So Joyce, Girgis, McGowan, Anderson and Fragoso, why don't you convince Professor George to change his mind. Professor Singer and I would gladly participate alone or together in a formal on-campus debate with Professor George alone or with a colleague of his choosing, or in any other reasonable format. I look forward to your response. Lee Silver Professor of Molecular Biology and Public Affairs
Security column written without knowledge of Princeton's past
Regarding 'Eliminating redundencies' (Monday, Feb. 12, 2007):
I am glad to hear that Medeiros has formed such a strong assessment of the University after only a semester here. Some would say that this isn't enough time to make sweeping accusations of the "redundancy" of our campus police force; some would also say that his blatant lack of basic research would not qualify him to publish a column on these accusations.
As a freshman, it would be impossible for Medeiros to know what club pickups were like last year. It would also be impossible for him to know about the vandalism and drunken debauchery and that resulted in pickups almost being discontinued after the complaints and reports filed. This year there were strict rules which the clubs had to follow in order to prevent this from happening again; and there are more officers on duty the Friday of pickups for the express purpose of shadowing the clubs as they meander through campus.
Medeiros also asserts that his personal experience has only recorded two crimes against students. Bike thefts at that. How unthreatening. There have been several crimes against the rest of the student body this year, however, 2006 statistics aren't out yet, but between 2002 and 2005 there were 21 forcible sex offenses, three cases of aggravated assault, over 200 reported burglaries and five incidents of arson. Our crime rate is higher than Dartmouth's, yet our police force is almost twice as big — this would support the column assumption that the two schools were comparable. Dartmouth is in rural New Hampshire.We are nestled near three of the most crime-ridden cities in the country — Newark, Camden and Trenton. Somehow I doubt that the Orange Bubble and bike locks can protect us against the overflow from our surrounding area.
There is no way to comment on the unoriginality of the library book checkers. Also, mocking TSA regulations is something only an ignorant, uneducated American would consider seriously. Perhaps the Class of 2010 is too young to remember the September of 2001. Lauren Tracey '08
Laptop use in the classroom can be productive
Regarding 'Computers' role in classrooms questioned' (Tuesday, Feb. 13, 2007):
Are we going to have an article every semester (heck, every half semester) on why laptop use in the class is the devil? Perhaps people should realize that for some of us, laptops provide a way of taking many, legible, well-organized notes. Plus, it's much harder to lose them than sheets of paper.
As for PowerPoint — there's a very simple solution. Post 100 slides every week (mix in completely useless ones) and say that in order to know which ones are real and which are junk you actually have to come to lecture. The main reason for not attending lecture is not wanting to get out of bed to get there — once you're there you don't have as many reasons for just leaving. Robert Glasgow '07
Same-sex posters foster, rather than squash, dialogue
Regarding 'Pride Alliance posters too loud for some' (Thursday, Feb. 15, 2007):
David Schaengold '07 thinks that the Pride posters "squash, rather than encourage, genuine dialogue." What does this mean? How do posters "squash" dialogue? What Schaengold would like to see "squashed" is, I suspect, any admission that sexuality is in some ways a public affair, not something dirty which we ought to find shameful. Debate is always good as long as it is civil and, frankly, I don't see how a piece of paper that symbolizes same-sex love and contains no insults to anyone can "squash" dialogue.
Words are very important and images of what is true are also important. It is called freedom of expression, and it harms no one. Dialogue begins when disagreement is public and manifest. The Pride poster, as I read it, says: "Love, I am here to debate. Talk to me." The squashing is in the eye of the beholder. Let me end with a lovely American quotation about freedom and safety: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." (Benjamin Franklin, 1755) Paolo Asso '02
A reflection on the Frist filibuster
In 2005, a group of liberal students staged a series of passionate protests in front of the Frist Campus Center, against the attempts of then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist '74 to eliminate certain Senate filibuster rules. Now they might realize, too late, that filibusters are a double-edged sword, since the Republican minority in the Senate has successfully filibustered the non-binding Iraq war resolution into oblivion.
Though the resolution passed the Senate with 56 votes, it lacked the necessary 60 to break a Senate filibuster. Perhaps it would be better if the Senate eliminated this silly non-constitutional procedural rule and returned to a state where a simple majority is all that is needed to win a vote. And perhaps the filibustering crusaders at Princeton might now regret the obstructionist tool they kept safe for the Republican minority in Congress. Michael Taylor '05
Read More
$56,000 in debt at graduation is not the financial aid Princeton advertises
Avi CheslerTake my story as an example — despite repeated evidence, both before and after taking out loans, that I would be unable to pay what Princeton asked of me — the University never set a cost that I could truly meet loan-free.
In the Garden State’s service and the service of humanity
Olivia Ragan, Lauren Aung, and Madison LintonIt is important to cultivate in students interest in local and state level change, because it is the most direct way to give back to the New Jersey community that sustains the University.
Why do two-thirds of your summer research wages go to Princeton, anyway?
Isaac BarsoumThe income that students earn from employment is not “miscellaneous.” So Princeton must decide: Does it want its students — all of them, not only those who can afford it — to be able to work on the important research happening at Princeton, or be forced to go home?
The income that students earn from employment is not “miscellaneous.” So Princeton must decide: Does it want its students — all of them, not only those who can afford it — to be able to work on the important research happening at Princeton, or be forced to go home?