The Student News Site of University of Arizona

The Daily Wildcat

100° Tucson, AZ

The Daily Wildcat

The Daily Wildcat

 

    Mail Bag

    Mall preacher’s ‘rantings’ should be dismissed

    As usual, spring brings with it a man on a mission: Brother Jed. And as usual, Brother Jed brings with him a countless number of students spewing vitriol over the misappropriation of religious conviction. This is a shame, as Brother Jed does not preach religion. He preaches fanaticism.

    It doesn’t matter if someone comes under the guise of God or a partisan group or Jerry Rice. Regardless of the supposed sponsor, someone who brings hateful propaganda is not to be granted the time or effort of an academic university. To all those who show up in droves to prove Brother Jed wrong with their Bible citations and rhetoric: STOP! The man is a farce and should be treated as such.

    To bring intelligent debate into the setting created by Brother Jed is to enable him with the sense that we as a populous lend credibility to his rantings. And quite frankly, we don’t. Rather than treat him as a legitimate threat to the institutions of religion or organized debate, treat him as but a soothsayer, clamoring to the knee-jerk masses who believe they can prove him wrong. But really, the asinine are infallible in their logic.

    Zachary Smith

    psychology junior

    Closing of sorority house detrimental to students

    I encourage the leadership of the UA to initiate a dialogue with the National Chapter to reverse the decision to close the Alpha Chi Omega house. (“”Alpha Chi Omega lacks members, loses charter,”” Feb. 18, 2009) According to the National Executive Committee, the charter of the AXO house was yanked because the house had “”too few”” members and the women were not receiving the full “”AXO Experience.”” That is doublespeak for “”you are not good enough to keep your house.””

    Yet the house had nearly 70 dedicated women. Large by most standards at most colleges. Now, there are women who have been displaced, who have to find other housing or who may leave the university. Thanks to the twisted logic of the National Committee, it is the educational experience of these women that has been negatively impacted.

    What is ironic is that the AXO women were happy, productive people who enjoyed each others’ company. The National Chapter was more concerned about the size of the sorority and their “”image”” than the impact closing the house would have on the lives of the women who lived in the house.

    The actions of the National Chapter did more to damage the reputation of the organization than anything the local members did. Sadly, there are women who were initiated only a few months ago who now have nowhere to go. They certainly can’t join another sorority.

    As a father of one of the members, I question how the UA could allow such an action on their campus. Greek Life or Student Affairs should make it well known that no national organization can do this to a fraternity or sorority, or any organization for that matter, without at least a year’s notice. The impact on the education of a student is far too great. The university should use its influence to have this house reinstated.

    Richard Webb

    California resident

    Intelligent design deserves intelligent reporting

    “”Life exists without intelligent designer”” by Steven Kwan (Feb. 18, 2009) snagged a spot on the front page as news, but it was overtly biased and insufficiently researched. The piece posed as an objective description of Daniel Dennett’s talk in Centennial Hall, but was littered with Kwan’s opinions presented as facts. Top that with a blatant opinion as the title and poof! Adiós credibility.

    Where were the event stats? What makes Dennett an expert on this topic? He’s a “”Tufts University philosopher””? I’m a University of Arizona philosopher. Aren’t we all? To Mr. Darwin, happy birthday! (And happy birthday Mr. Lincoln; you didn’t get enough love on your 200th.) Your disciples are thinkers, but those who argue the case for intelligent design think, too. Take no offense; it’s a common misconception.

    Darwin wasn’t an atheist. He never denied the possibility of God. He considered himself an agnostic, believing that our incredible universe was created by an Intelligent Designer, perhaps (brace yourself) God. The complexity of life awed him even before the field of genetics, with DNA’s intricacies, developed. Darwin said, “”If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection.”” The existence of symbiotic relationships between organisms obliterates it.

    The fossil record still lacks transitional forms. The Piltdown man was revealed to be a hoax in 1953. The probabilities of Earth’s chemical cycles, physical laws, and atmospheric conditions to be in the precise proportions necessary to sustain life are staggering. I’m no expert, but if you doubt my facts, consider: are evolution and God mutually exclusive? Can you scientifically prove God isn’t flipping the genetic switches, selecting the advantageous adaptations for His creatures? No and no.

    I’ve only skimmed the surface of the primordial soup. Intelligent scientists, of all faiths and none, acknowledge that evidence in favor of an Intelligent Designer is dependable – unlike Mr. Kwan’s report. But, Mr. Kwan, don’t lose hope. Your design included an intelligent brain to process these words and consider how to improve in future articles.

    Paige Wheeler

    creative writing sophomore

    More to Discover
    Activate Search