What types of concerts would you like to see at the UA in the future?
Lori Foley / columnist
Ones that sell out. I loved the fact that pretty much every seat was full at the Franz Ferdinand/Death Cab for Cutie concert Monday. Even if the concert wasn’t a moneymaker for the Associated Students of the University of Arizona, it clearly brought acts to campus that students wanted to see. I’m excited to see if ASUA President-elect Erin Hertzog will be able to make good on her campaign platform of bringing bands to campus that will turn a profit next year. But even if we just break even, it’s good to have bands that bring together large groups in the campus community.
Michael Huston / columnist
Ones that make money. It’s fine that ASUA and the University Activities Board have tried to bring exciting concerts to campus this year, and such concerts have the potential to be fantastic events for students at a reasonable price. So far, though, the organizers of these concerts haven’t proved they can handle the responsibility of developing an affordable event for students while still making a profit or even breaking even. (See Jason Mraz.) If concerts can be brought to campus without student government ending up in the red, then I’m all for it. Otherwise, back to the iPods.
Yusra Tekbali / columnist
Bigger acts. Although they are more expensive and a lot harder to book, I would much rather go to one great show than a couple of ordinary ones. It’s obvious from the response of the huge crowd at Death Cab and Franz Ferdinand that having a popular, dynamic band once in a while is more important than hosting a couple of laughable acts. (Ashlee Simpson anyone?) Having more popular singers guarantees more profit. Who wouldn’t want to pay $30 to see Sean Paul raise the temperature?
Should women be allowed to breastfeed anywhere in public in Arizona?
Lori Foley / columnist
Within reason. The bigger question is, do we really need to spend our Legislature’s time (and, in so doing, our taxpayers’ money) passing a bill (HB 2376) to decriminalize the act? Given that no one’s actually been prosecuted in Arizona for breastfeeding in public, I’m not so sure. Seems like a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can understand that mothers breastfeed out of necessity, not to titillate. However, those lacking in common sense do seem to abound here, so maybe it’s good to get the old rule off the books.
Michael Huston / columnist
Yes, but they probably shouldn’t do it. This is like the guy whose headphones are turned up so loud in a quiet room that everyone else can hear his crappy music. It’s not illegal, but it can be off-putting or even annoying. We shouldn’t make it a crime for a woman to breastfeed her child in public view, even if – gasp – it means an occasional Janet Jacksonesque “”suckling malfunction.”” That being said, mothers of infants should take into consideration their surroundings when selecting a place to nurse as a matter of general courtesy for someone who might be bothered by the sight.
Yusra Tekbali / columnist
No; that’s just ridiculous. Honestly, is it that hard for moms on the go to find a bathroom or invest in some tinted windows? This bill is essentially arguing that indecent exposure is OK if it’s necessary or if it’s not perceived as sexual. If passed, it will not only disgust restaurant diners and freak out little children, but it will provide the women’s movement with another hypocritical right to brag about. It’s not liberating for women to expose themselves in public regardless of why they are doing it. Breastfeeding is a private act and making it public is hardly revolutionary.
Should people entering the country illegally be charged with a felony?
Lori Foley / columnist
Depends on who’s entering the country. Certainly, coyotes and drug smugglers should face felony charges and jail time. But charging the average illegal immigrant crossing the border to escape desperate poverty with a felony is silly and would do little to help anyone on either side of the debate. Those who claim to be “”fed up”” with subsidizing education or health care for illegal immigrants would get to subsidize prison time instead. These people are already risking possible death by crossing; the possibility of a little jail time in an American penitentiary isn’t likely to prove much of a discouragement.
Michael Huston / columnist
Yes, but it doesn’t stop there. To really address the huge problem our border presents, we must develop comprehensive immigration reform, like that proposed by Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, which should include an effective guest worker program and increased opportunity for people to immigrate to this country legally, while rejecting amnesty for those already here. The millions of illegal immigrants in our country have broken our laws and deserve to face the consequences just like any American citizen would. Making it a felony to be here illegally will send a clear message that we are serious about our laws and our border.
Yusra Tekbali / columnist
No. The U.S. economy relies on immigrant labor. Agriculture in some states, such as California, would sink if we kicked out the illegals. Moreover, not enough Americans have shown an interest in filling in their shoes, so the economic loss would be severe. You can’t deport 11 million people, and calling them “”criminals”” only inflates the debate and allows the government to classify an entire race by throwing stereotypical labels at it. Immigration reform doesn’t come about by criminalizing a civil issue or by giving the secretary of Homeland Security the power to decide who is worthy of being a citizen.
