Letters to the Editor (Editorial Policies)
Posted on November 13, 2006

Homosexuality not comparable to civil rights

In Brian Goodman’s Nov. 9 piece, “The acceptance speech of the marriage amendment,” the author criticized the recently passed Virginia amendment to define marriage by both comparing it to Jim Crow laws and mocking the voters of Virginia as Southern religious bigots. I’m not sure if the author realized what the civil rights movement involved, but it was surely a lot more than the entitlement of married couples. The author declares in his ending paragraph, “…you have successfully made homosexuals the new blacks.” Let’s remember that the amendment in question defined marriage. It did not involve curbing the tide of lynching, the right to a fair trial, the right to own property, or the right to vote. The two situations aren’t analogous in the way the author uses them and are obviously more rhetoric intended to build support by blind emotional reaction. There is a difference between general civil rights and the rights involving marital benefits. Don’t belittle the struggle of post-slavery African-Americans and the civil rights movement to further your personal opinion on whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry or not. It is also ironic that marriage is being defined all over the country, not just where these alleged Southern Christian bigots are forcing their will.

Paul Stroup, sophomore athletic training major

Condemning of amendment shows hypocrisy

I would like to thank Mr. Goodman for presenting hypocrisy in its clearest form to readers of The Breeze (Nov. 9). It amazes me how those who preach “tolerance and acceptance” can, in the same breath, hurl insults at the opposite side. In this article alone, Mr. Goodman told me (since I voted “yes” to the marriage amendment) that I am a religious zealot with a “blatant hatred” for others, and that I am no better than a Jim Crow racist. Excuse me, Mr. Goodman, but I have never told a gay person they cannot drink from a water fountain, or sit next to me on the bus, or attend the same university as me. I simply do not believe they have the right to change a social institution that has been in place for more generations that we can count. Neither do 57 percent of Virginians and 20 other states that have already passed marriage amendments. How nice of you, Mr. Goodman, to “accept” our opinion the way you tell us we should “accept” yours.    

Mr. Goodman and his cohorts praise the democratic system when it ousts the evil Republicans, yet they condemn it when it proves that most Virginians do not approve of a practice they personally condone. Apparently he and others like him believe that the people should make their voices heard … but only if they’re not religious, conservative, or just downright traditional. Sorry, Mr. Goodman. You can’t have it both ways.   

Kathryn Manning, sophomore political science and history major

Taking a stand against sin should be respected

Many times when I come across an opinion that is different than my own, I try to ignore it and let life go on. However, there is one statement I take personally and feel the need to clear up. Brace yourselves, I am about to say something politically incorrect: I believe homosexuality is wrong. But before anyone starts jumping the gun, let me also say this: I don’t think that those who are homosexuals are “bad people.” I am a Christian who simply believes it to be a sin. Saying that does not condemn anyone; nobody is perfect. I am guilty of sin myself, everyone is. I even have a best friend that is homosexual and I don’t love her any less for it.  A book I read says it this way: “homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth.”  I truly believe that, but I’m not going to encourage the practice. Tuesday’s ballot asked me a question, and I answered honestly.

In response to the opinion article on Nov. 9, I do not appreciate being accused of “blatant hatred” and being compared to the slaveholders of the 1860s. Excuse me for standing up for my beliefs next to you standing up for yours. Yes, there are those that mistreat people, but if you’re so against discrimination, please don’t generalize an entire voting population just because the few rudest ones have the biggest mouths. 

Virginia True, junior business major

Library exhibit details Mideast violence

I would urge everyone in the JMU community to visit the “X-Ray Project” display in the main lobby of Carrier Library. The exhibit, sponsored by various Jewish and Israeli groups, as well as JMU’s own Nelson Institute, consists of numerous medical X-rays taken of victims of suicide bombers in the Middle East. The images serve to put a human visage on the deadly violence that has plagued the region for decades.

Sadly, this evocative exhibition focuses only on one aspect of Middle Eastern violence, as if such acts occur in a vacuum. Nowhere are there any images of the other victims of violence in the region. No X-rays depicting the effects of rubber bullets, cluster bombs or tank shells.

As recently as Nov. 7, Lucy Fielder of the Christian Science Monitor reported that people in Lebanon are still being killed and maimed each week by cluster bomblets dropped during the past summer. Like the targets of the suicide bombers, most of these victims are woman and children too. Regardless of the politics involved, all of the victims are human beings who deserve our concern and compassion.

Again, I would urge everyone to see the X-Ray Project before it closes Nov. 20, keeping in mind that it tells only a part of the story. Unless we address all aspects of this very complicated issue, the exhibition runs the very real risk of crossing the line between information and propaganda.

Mark Purington, senior cataloger, Carrier Library

A slinging of slurs this election

Did we vote in favor of the philosophies of men, or against racists and sexists? Campaign ads bash the opponents while clogging our heads with cleverly crafted person attack. Trying to block them out is futile because they are easily embedded in us. I can remember why we shouldn’t vote for this candidate — he was dehumanized by the other side. But test me on the useful information I learned from these ads, and I would absolutely fail.

We shouldn’t allow the attempts to discredit opponents as widely as it occurs. If a candidate sinks to name-calling, our political system is reduced to a playground where the biggest bullies get the upper hand. How can I make an informed decision when the information that’s shoveled to us speaks to graphic novels a man wrote in the past? We need to focus future campaigns to an open exchange of ideas. This can only work if the candidates provide us with clear ads about their positions.

Although I think bashing candidates is unprofessional, exposing relevant wrongdoing by a candidate welcome, if it is done tastefully. Elections should not be a race to smash reputations and saunter into the position with a golden crowd. Candidates should be elected by the way they will serve their people.

Michael Hickman, sophomore religion major

SGA not a bureaucratic hindrance

I think Alex Sirney’s article referring to the SGA as a bureaucratic hindrance is extremely one-sided and I would like to clear up some of the false allegations that he made. As author of the bill to take away NAACP’s status, as well as chair of the finance committee, I would like to say that the bill got to senate after much deliberation. First of all, the SGA Finance committee, as well as the Student Advisory Board, which has one representative from each front-end budgeted group on campus, considered it. It is SGA’s goal to give funding to every organization that we can. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done. Because of our limited budget, we are not able to give funds to everyone on campus as much as we may want to. Each group is given a strict set of criteria that it has to meet. They are also required to come to SGA every other year to make sure that these goals are being met. The SGA and the FEB board are there to act as a filter to make sure that the most deserving groups get the first cut of this money. It is nothing personal; if it were up to me, every group on this campus would get money and we would have unlimited funds. But until then, I am proud to say that the SGA is there to act as a filter, and not a hindrance.

Brian J. Bennett, senior political science and English major, SGA senator at large