Prop 102 would ‘breed bigotry’
It was with great interest that I read Nate Dahl’s justifications in support of Prop. 102. Dahl is correct in that families are indeed the “”building blocks”” of our society. However, our nation also rests on core principles like tolerance, equality and liberty. Amending the state constitution must never be done for something that does nothing but divide and breed bigotry.

Dahl warns against “”rampant adultery and sexual perversion”” as potential threats to our future. The idea that homosexuality is somehow single-handedly eroding our society’s moral fiber is ludicrous. Perhaps Dahl hasn’t noticed the alarmingly high divorce rate among heterosexual couples? Promiscuity is hardly reserved for the gay community. Many committed gay couples are seeking stable, legally recognized partnerships. In what way does that harm the American family?

The family unit functions in many different variations. Single parents, adoptive parents, and gay couples are capable of doing just as good (or bad) of a job at parenting as traditional straight parents are. To think otherwise is narrow-minded. To amend our constitution with the sole purpose of stopping one demographic from having equal rights is prejudiced, silly, and truly “”weak and confused.””

Bethany Evans
political science junior

Voting is about making informed choices, not free concert tickets
For the past week, I, like everyone else, have been approached countless times by sorority girls with glittery signs, political groups at tables on the Mall, students with clipboards, and even a guy with a bullhorn, all in an effort to get students to register to vote. Unluckily for them, I registered the day I turned eighteen, but this system of mass registration worries me.

If students couldn’t take the time to go to their nearest public library, post office, etc. when they came of legal age to fill out and mail a simple form, or if it wasn’t important enough to them to do so, then are they really going to take the time to research each candidate’s platform, watch the presidential and vice presidential debates, or keep abreast of the latest election news? I don’t think so.

I’m not trying to disparage or belittle those of you who registered this week who really do want to vote. I think the so-called “”youth”” turnout is a very important part of our voting process and needs to be recognized; but when students are registering to vote to receive free Death Cab for Cutie concert tickets or other incentives, I don’t think I want them anywhere near the polls on election day because I’m not sure I trust them to make smart decisions.

I guess this is my plea for all students of voting age to truly appreciate our electoral process, which entails taking your right to vote seriously, and recognizing that it’s your responsibility to be an informed voter, regardless of whether or not you got free concert tickets.

Jennifer Bushroe
creative writing junior

Prop 102 will strengthen American system
It is Julianna Bradley’s complete misunderstanding of the people who support Prop 102 that represents “”superstitious and irrational fear”” … leading to “”the end of civilization””. There are two issues at play with Prop 102 that this neolithic-minded student knows absolutely nothing about. Yet, here she is in print. The first concern is the moral issues at play and the second is the governing issues at play. The moral issues are simple and straightforward: many people of varying faiths believe that any kind of sexuality outside the scope of heterosexuality is immoral. It is not discriminatory against people at all. I support Prop 102 and yet I have friends and acquaintances that are homosexual. It has nothing to do with undermining the “”valuable contribution(s)”” of the people of this orientation. They are just as brilliant, successful, and contributive to our nation and society in many realms. Our disagreement is a moral one. At this point Miss Bradley would say, what about separation of church and state? Well, this is a federal argument and the bill is legislative and local so it does not apply. Secondly, every law is moral. The difference is which moral direction the nation should go in. So please Julianna, let us be honest and keep this discussion on a personal level rather than leveling accusations against one another. Every law is discriminatory. Which side are you on?

As for the governing issues, the reason the bill was drawn up was because there is a fundamental crisis in terms of governmental function. Even the homosexual community ought to be worried when one arm of government usurps the powers of another. The crisis is that the judicial branch is evicting the legislative branch of our society. This is a serious issue that Miss Bradley and those of her mindset refuse to acknowledge. Why? This is a legitimate fear because our system, which gives us our freedoms to even discuss an issue like this, is what is breaking down. Does Miss Bradley know that there are many people supporting Prop 102 that are not doing so for moral reasons? Where is that in her discussion? It will not be found because she knows only her belief system. This bill is supporting the American system; it will strengthen it. If Julianna Bradley and those who support her beliefs want a change, do it legally like the rest of us. Write a bill and get it passed and stop antagonizing people for what they believe, as long as it is in the limits of the law.

John Winchester
nondegree-seeking graduate