Letters to the Editor (Editorial Policies)
Posted on October 26, 2006

Let’s invade Richmond with our purple and gold

As many of you know, the Dukes have a bigger than big game against the Richmond Spiders Saturday in Richmond at 3 p.m.

I want to ask as many of you as can to attend the game. Although the University of Richmond has a fine football team (ranked 13th), they struggle to draw a crowd at their home stadium. Let’s take over the stadium! It would be great to see more purple and gold at the stadium than red and blue. Their stadium seats 22,000 and there will be plenty of tickets available.

It will be a great afternoon. Two excellent football teams will be competing, the Marching Royal Dukes will be going, and it will be great football weather. Load up the car with your friends, catch a cab, what the heck, charter a plane. But whatever you’ve got to do, come support us, and let’s show the world what it looks like when the JMU Nation comes to town! I look forward to seeing you there.

Mickey Matthews, JMU football coach

On Saturday, we must ‘bleed purple’ at the Richmond game

As a student at JMU, football season was always a phenomenal time. When we won the Division I-AA National Championship in 2004, my friends and I attended every playoff game, including making the trip to Chattanooga. The 2006 JMU season is quickly becoming another great season for the Dukes as we have rolled to a 6-1 record. I have attended every game thus far and have been anticipating the JMU-UR game for weeks, especially since our dismantling of then-No. 1 UNH. The UNH game was a huge boost to our confidence that we carried into the Homecoming game last week, and now we need to increase the intensity as the Dukes take on the Spiders at their Homecoming this Saturday! If you believe in the JMU Nation and are free on Saturday, get down to Richmond. It’s their Homecoming game and tickets are still available on their Web site, richmondspiders.cstv.com. I am positive our Homecoming sold out weeks, if not months, before. I attended the JMU-UR game in the 2004 season and it was a great venue for football, with a very large visitors’ section to their stadium. All this means that if you are a member of the JMU Nation: take off from work, reschedule that group meeting, get a baby sitter for the kids, do whatever it takes to get down to Richmond this Saturday for the 3 p.m. game against the Spiders. We need you down there, Dukes fans, come and show your support!

Matt Tremonte, JMU alumnus, class of 2005

JMU is Title IX-ing itself to death

As a graduate of JMU and a former scholarship athlete, JMU’s Title IX compliance actions raise many questions in my mind. JMU has chosen to cut athletic teams to meet a ratio. Six-tenths of JMU students are female; therefore, athletes should be 60 percent female, 40 percent male. Let’s examine what the application of this ratio would mean to the people whose salaries are paid by the students, parents and donors of JMU.

According to JMU’s 2005 statistical summary, 46 male instructors need to be cut from the College of Arts and Letters, 37 from Business, 31 from Science and Math, 30 from ISAT, 19 from Performing Arts and 31 from the administration. Eight female instructors need to leave the College of Education. In total, 184 male faculty members must be replaced.

I don’t believe the president, Dr. Rose, is six-tenths female, so he’s gone. At The Breeze, sorry, but one of your male editors gets a pink slip. What about the Greek system? What about the Board of Visitors, which made the decision to cut teams? Of 17 members, 11 are male.

There are better, more productive methods of managing a university than the application of ratios. Students, faculty and the administration should fight this sort of policy on all levels. If not, each one of you must consider that no matter how hard you work, how much you know, how talented you are or what skills you possess, you will someday end up on the short end of someone’s hallowed ratio.  

Jim Masloff, JMU alumnus, class of 1985

A difference between illegal sex scandals and immoral sex scandals

Although I found Mr. Finkelstein’s piece to be rather engaging, I found its content to be nothing short of a requiem for the Republican revolution. My main issue with Mr. Finkelstein’s truly thought-provoking rant was this line “...is it not hypocritical of the Democrats to attack the private matter of a public servant after they vehemently defended the Bill Clinton sex scandal as being a private matter?” This just seems funny to me, because while Clinton did, in fact, do a very disgraceful thing by partaking in a sexual act with an intern, placing him on the level of Mark Foley is an egregious comparison that seeks to make a fool out of your audience. Bill Clinton, unlike Mr. Foley, never attempted to solicit sexual acts online from underage boys with whom he held a position of power. Next time you want to accuse others of hypocrisy, I urge you to remember the simple adage: people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Joshua Hoffman, junior justice studies major

Even after death, the government should keep its hands off my body

Alex Sirney’s recent editorial, from Monday’s issue of The Breeze, disturbed me at the core of my being. He supported the position that organ donation should be compulsory after death. If a human being doesn’t have the right to dictate what happens to their body, what rights do they have? Why should I be forced to sacrifice part of myself, even in death, to help people I do not know or care about? Sirney cites court rulings that state a person has no control over how donated tissues are used, and uses this to back his position. However, it is illogical to compare the two, as the person has already chosen to donate that tissue, while Sirney supports the taking of tissue without consent.

I am currently a registered organ donor and have no problem with giving away things that I am not using, but I will only do so when I am free to choose that option. Sirney’s plan is the same as stealing. You wouldn’t allow the government to take your vacation house simply because you were not using it, why should they be able to take your organs?

David Schultz, freshman biology major

An innovative, ethical and legal way to increase organ donation

Alex Sirney suggested mandatory donation of all transplantable human organs. This would certainly increase the supply of human organs, but there’s no chance that this idea will become law in the foreseeable future.

Fortunately, there is an already-legal way to put a big dent in the organ shortage — give organs first to people who have agreed to donate their own organs when they die.

Giving organs first to organ donors will convince more people to register as organ donors. It will also make the organ allocation system more fair. People who aren’t willing to share the gift of life should go to the back of the waiting list as long as there is a shortage of organs.

Anyone who wants to donate their organs to others who have agreed to donate theirs can join LifeSharers. LifeSharers is a non-profit network of organ donors who agree to offer their organs first to other organ donors when they die. They do this through a form of directed donation that is legal in all 50 states and under federal law. Anyone can join for free at lifesharers.org, or by calling 1-888-ORGAN88. LifeSharers has 6,240 members, including 187 members in Virginia. More than 600 of our members are minor children enrolled by their parents.

David J. Undis, executive director, LifeSharers

Students lack research skills? Old books may be to blame

As a 2005 JMU grad, one of my favorite stories has to do with the outdated material at Carrier Library. A research trip led me to the basement of Carrier Library to the children’s section. I picked up a book on U.S. presidents, flipped to the back and found that the last president listed was Dwight D. Eisenhower. Wow.

Children’s literature isn’t the only section containing books more suited to a museum than a working library. When I was writing a research paper about African politics for a GHIST class, I stumbled upon racially offensive literature, reflecting the atmosphere of a prejudiced America 60, 70 and 80 years ago.

I do agree that students are on MySpace and Facebook too much; I, too, was guilty of this when I was in school. But if there is a call for a back-to-basics emphasis on researching the “old-fashioned” way, the materials available to students must be more up-to-date. Relevant, current information is better found at reputable Internet sites rather than within the yellowing pages of whatever’s on the shelves at JMU.

Many of the books at Carrier Library are perfect for a time capsule, but ill-suited for academic purposes.

Stephanie Strauss, JMU alumna, class of 2005