A few weeks ago, the Class of 2003 ran a heavily advertised event sponsored by Princeton's very own Alcohol Initiative (so appropriately named!). The event was held in McCosh, and the large lecture hall was filled to capacity.
Uninformed rhetoric used to describe dialog on homosexualityA recent opinion article by Mr. O'Brien considers the status of the campus climate on issues related to "homosexuality" in light of Pride Week features.
Even against the backdrop of Israel's thirty-five year occupation, the events of the past few weeks seem particularly awful.
It's happened. My worst fears about Princeton have been realized. The jibes of my friends from home have come true.
(Due to an editorial error, Mike Kimberly's column was not printed in its entirety. This column includes his additions)In a recent column for The Daily Princetonian responding to President Bush's speech on cloning, Dave Sillers suggested that creating life with the express purpose of destroying it is wrong.
It's mid-April, and we've already had several 90 degree sweltering days. This winter we set new highs for monthly average global temperatures.
On April 18, the University received two petitions, one calling for divestment from companies that do business in Israel and the other opposing such an action.
I have occupied an office (number 49) at the top of the many stairs of the fourth entryway in McCosh Hall for more years than I can accurately declare.
There is perhaps no issue, from abortion to race relations, where we forget the virtues of free and open discussion more quickly than when it comes to the question of homosexuality.
Cloning is wrong, no matter the reason. Admittedly, George W. Bush is not the best with words, and his explanation as to why cloning is morally unjustifiable leaves something to be desired.
Last Monday I had the privilege of joining a group of professors and students for dinner preceding the Bioethics Forum lecture, "When Does Life Begin?" Near the end of the meal, I noticed Professor Peter Singer engaged in an animated discussion with Nigel Cameron, one of the speakers for that evening.
Currently, there are two bills working their way through Congress, both entitled the "Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001." The bill offered by Senators Feinstein and Kennedy (Dem.) would ban only reproductive cloning ? cloning that would lead to the birth of a child ? whereas the bill sponsored by Senators Brownback, Bond '60 and Smith (Rep.) would ban both reproductive and therapeutic cloning.Underneath all of the controversy and political rhetoric, it is important for us to carefully examine the arguments for and against both forms of cloning, in order to make an informed decision as a society.In a speech last Wednesday, President Bush expressed worries that cloning research would inevitably lead to "a society in which human beings are grown for spare body parts and children are engineered to custom specifications." Both of these concerns may be unfounded.The president is mistaken that cloning will result in children that are engineered to custom specifications.
No 'gratuitous diversity' at this UniversityAfter reading the Publisher's note on the inside of the front cover of this month's Tory, I was upset to find that there are certain people on this campus who believe Princeton concentrates too much on diversity while ignoring more important Western values.Pete Hegseth '03, the writer of this piece, acknowledges that "Diversity is a note-worthy discussion topic, yet highly overvalued at this University." After reading this sentence I went back to check to make sure Pete Hegseth actually attended Princeton, a school which in my mind is lacking in its development of a diverse environment.
The April issue of the Princeton Tory, entitled "Killing Feminism: OWL sabotages the women's movement" is on your doorstep and I sincerely hope you have perused the issue.
(This column is in response to Pete Hegseth's recent article about diversity in The Tory).If we wish to define diversity simply as "differing view points" we are deceiving ourselves.
Princeton's appointment of Professor Cornel West adds another outstanding scholar to the university's faculty rosters.
Cornel West's return to Princeton seems to have been acclaimed as the greatest faculty acquisition since Albert Einstein.
The re-acquisition of Cornel West to Princeton University places the final jewel in the crown of the ambitious Program in African-American Studies, which has made it known that it wouldn't mind being a full-fledged department.
I have seen the incredible range of emotions recently felt by every person in Israel. No one has not cried, cheered, been struck speechless, been angry, been confused or been horrified.
As founder and president of PACT: Princeton Against Cancer Together, I am responding to Aileen Nielsen's inaccurate and irresponsible piece of journalism (April 9).In her not-quite seven months at Princeton, Ms. Nielsen seems to have formulated a strict and regimented "drill" to deal with proactive campaigns on campus.
