Craig should reshape, not resign

I am quite appalled by everything these DUMB social conservatives (as if there are any smart ones) are saying about Larry Craig. Now, personally I am quite disgusted that a man who uses his influence to discriminate against gays and push for laws hurting them would dare try to live like a hypocrite. That said, I think he deserves a second chance. I don’t think he should bow to these freaks and American Taliban whose only desire is to see gays and lesbians put on an island and nuked. Let’s not forget that Adolf Hitler tried to cure gays and pushed for their arrests. Tell me how the social conservatives are ANY DIFFERENT?

It is high time the Republican Party stop pandering to the authoritarian neo-Nazi bedroom police who follow the ways of Sexual McCarthyism and want to turn America into a smoldering hellhole of intolerance where gays and lesbians are forced to undergo medical treatment and be put in prisons. The Republicans are good people, but their base is messed up and they need to be called out on it. It was in the 1980s and 1990s that social conservatives called for the medical “”curing”” of gays and lesbians, and in 2003 they tried to preserve laws that would allow for their arrests in their own bedrooms. Every time I speak out against these bastards and bigots I get falsely accused of being a “”Christian-hater”” or being “”intolerant of their values.”” It is time that Larry Craig stood up and defended himself. He needs to come out of the closet, admit he was a hypocrite, admit he should not use government to pander to hate-mongers and the scum of the Earth and BE A MAN! If Larry Craig resigns from the Senate he will be looked at as just “”one more fag”” who succumbed to the conformity of a brain-dead society that preys on the weak and punishes the innocent.

Joel Shooster
political science senior

Check your ‘Fast Facts!’

When the Arizona Daily Wildcat reported on April 26, 2006, that the Mount Palomar telescope could see to a specific distance (angular resolution is the only meaningful measure of a telescope’s capabilities), I sat silent. When the Wildcat reported two days later that color absorb heat (in reality, objects of a color absorb light, which is then converted into heat, not to mention the loose definitions of “”black”” and “”white”” that were used), I sat silent. When the Wildcat reported on March 20, 2006, that the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter “”lands safely”” (orbiters, by definition, do not land), I sat silent. But I can sit silent no longer. Last Thursday, the Wildcat reported in its “”Fact Facts”” section that the only letter that does not appear on the periodic table is “”F.”” Actually, there are six elements with the letter “”F”” in the symbol. To the Wildcat’s credit, they printed a correction to this error in Friday’s edition. Nevertheless, that does not change the fact that this sort of error is far too common. I understand that mistakes happen, but the Wildcat, and its “”Fact Fasts”” section in particular, has shown little regard for scientific accuracy. Most embarrassing for the Wildcat, a vast majority of these errors could be easily be prevented through a simple act of proofreading. As it stands now, the Wildcat is a laughing stock among my fellow physics majors due to the frequency of these errors. For repeatedly showing us that they do not take their scientific accuracy and credibility seriously, the Wildcat and its “”Fast Facts”” section get a Fail.

Mike Fenwick
junior majoring in astronomy, math and physics

Bring back ‘No Relation’

In her Sept. 7 letter, Julie Garrison bemoans the fact that “”No Relation”” has seemingly been pulled from the back page of the Wildcat. I wholeheartedly agree with her position – though it may be largely insensitive and often offensive, it still has a right to be published as long as the readers enjoy it. Let’s not start censoring our authors for rubbing people the wrong way, lest we run the risk of trading free speech for the well-intentioned yet ill-conceived beast of political correctness. I mean, if it is acceptable to run advertisements for strip clubs all through the paper, then why can’t a comic make fun of someone’s religion? I say bring back the comic, and to those who find it offensive, don’t read it.

Jeffrey Brown
junior majoring in engineering and math

Comic’s censoring unnecessary

In Tuesday’s Mailbag section of the Wildcat, a couple of disgruntled students or alumni expressed their opinion regarding the comic strip entitled “”No Relation.”” The letter called for the removal of the strip, and to my astonishment, the Wildcat staff catered to the writers’ wishes. The indignant pair claimed the strip was “”too offensive.”” While they have every right to judge the ethical value of its content, I reserve at the same time my right to read the material and enjoy it. They have the option of disregarding the “”insensitive”” nature of the comic by simply not reading it. I, however, cannot be appeased with an alternative; I have no supplement for the comic I look forward to every morning. The “”No Relation”” comic shares my style of humor and is my only representative in the comic strip section. C’mon, we’re all adults here. Which reminds me; why was there no outcry regarding the recurring adult advertisement (you know, the one with two half-naked women groping each other) by the writers? Surely that is on the same level of vulgarity or insensitivity, yet they did not mention it because they are most evidently capable of browsing past and ignoring it. Either that or they are proponents of women-on-women action, which is an unlikely inconsistency to arise considering their position on offensive material. In the words of Friday’s pro-“”No Relation”” writer Julie Garrison, “”I encourage you to bring (No Relation) back.””

Ryan Lawson
business freshman