Mondav. May 7, 2001
The University Daily Kansan
Section A • Page 5
Letters to the Editor Respect the mentally retarded
I was horrified to read Justin Henning's editorial supporting capital punishment of people with mental disabilities who commit crimes ("The death penalty and mentally retarded convicts" counterpoint, April 25). He argued for the execution of John Paul Peny, a mentally retarded man unable to understand the crime he committed or the sentence he received.
First, Henning grievously missed the point of John Steinbeck's story Of Mice and Men. George kills Lenny not, as Henning argued, in response to Lenny's accidental killing of a woman but rather to save him from a worse death at the hands of a mob. And Lenny did not kill the woman because he "was unable to control his own anger."
The crime that Penny committed was indeed awful. But Henning stepped away from the magnitude of Penny's crime as a justification for a capital sentence and instead argued that Penny should be executed because of his low IQ. He wrote, "Penny's sentence should be carried out not only as a penalty for his crime, but also as an act of humanity."
Henning's argument calls to mind Nazi Germany's state eugenics program, called T4. This program was started by Hitler in 1939 with the established mandate of killing anyone whose life was deemed "unworthy," people who the Nazis characterized as "burdensome lives" and "useless eaters." As many as 200,000 people with disabilities were murdered at killing centers that foreshadowed the extermination camps where Jews, homosexuals and other "undesirables" were murdered. The stated purpose of T4 was "so that patients considered incurable, according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, can be granted a mercy killing."
A look at the historical context of Henning's views removes the shallow veil of "compassion" he claims to espouse and reveals the horrifying moral and social implications of any argument that some people just don't deserve to live.
Kris D'Atri Canton, Ohio, graduate student
Christ is the only way to truth
Mahatma Gandhi once said, "I like their Christ; I don't like their Christians." Friedrich Nietzsche said, "I will believe in the Redeemer when the Christian looks a little more redeemed."
As a Christian, I know what these men are talking about and how
uneside ideas need to be addressed. I do not want to make excuses for the Fred Phelpses of the world or the Inquisition or the Crusades. I believe they were and are wrong. All Christians in some way or fashion go against basic Christian thought. The hardest part when talking about Christianity to non-Christians is coming to an understanding that we are in "need of a savior. If you don't believe that, then Christianity to you is foolish. The dilemma isn't one of morals being a good or bad. Jesus didn't come to make bad people, good people, as Lee Strobel says in his book The Case for Faith. Jesus came to make dead people alive.
But Christianity is now saying it is the exclusive truth compared with other thoughts and beliefs. Truth is exclusive. You can't have two answers; when you say something is true, you are consequently saying there is something false. Either one religion is correct or they all are. If you analyze most religions, you will see how most of them cannot co-exist.
I am not pushing my beliefs on you. My friends are from all lifestyles and religions. Tolerance isn't the issue, either. If you do not want to listen, walk away or tell me so, but if you do, I believe I can offer something that will change your life forever. I am offering a hope, a purpose, a future like none other. I apologize for Christians who have strayed from the beliefs of Christ, who have turned his words to make them say what they want. But I ask that you do not look at our "weakest link." Instead, look at our light at the end of the tunnel: Jesus Christ.
Clinton Pfalser Caney junior
Church has not followed Christ
A number of columns and letters have been in the Kansan recently about the validity of Christianity. What often strikes me about the arguments deceiving Christianity is their appeal to church history and the abuses of the church.
Their view of Scripture is skewed by how the institutional church has often contradicted the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.
So, as one writer claimed, Jesus can be viewed as encouraging the beating of slaves because church leaders of the past owned slaves. The teachings of Paul on women can be viewed as sexist because for centuries church leaders often discriminated against women and even abused them.
demning them. They were zealous, not for God, but for rules. They sought not the favor of God but press tige and honor in the eyes of others.
If you read the four Gospeles, you will notice that Jesus saves his harshest words for the religious leaders of the day (Matthew 23 and John 8). While they were condemning prostitutes, tax collectors, adulterers and the like, Jesus was con-
When they had a choice to follow Jesus or retain their way of life, they chose the latter. Church leaders have made that choice through the centuries. And when they have, they give the seeking world a false view of Jesus and the truth He proclaimed.
Some call Christianity a religion or a philosophy. If that is what people who call themselves Christians are committed to, they risk the same fate as the teachers of the law and the Pharisees.
Religion is made up of traditions and practices. Philosophies are developed around certain ideas. Jesus came to promote neither. He simply says, "Follow me." There is only one way to find God: Follow Jesus. For He said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me" (John 14:6). This is the essence of Christianity.
Jim Musser Campus Christians campus minister
Queers deserve equal rights
I was disturbed by some opinions in the April 23 "Condemned but keeping the faith" article.
I picked up the coolest pamphlet at the April 20 Drag Show from A.C.T in Faith. The cover stated, "Finally!... Everything Jesus said about homosexuality. Clear, Concise, and Easy to Read." "The inside of the pamphlet was blank. I thought it was the best point about the issue I had ever read. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. The Old Testament did, and that is where the Christian condemnation of homosexuality comes from. The Old Testament cannot be read literally.
Christians no longer follow several rules in the Old Testament (i.e. the Kosher laws). But Christians sure like to point out Leviticus 18:22, which contains the famous quote for anti-homosexual Christian doctrine. "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abamination." "This citation is taken out of context. The chapter following 18:22 states, "... nor shall you put on a garment made of two different materials." "Does this mean that anyone wearing a 74 percent cotton/26 percent nylon pants of pairs is going to burn in hell? I don't think so. One of the University Christian Fellowship members stated in the article that people who are "picking and choosing one part of a coherent document ... are eliminating part of the truth of it." If she is wearing 74 percent cotton/26 percent nylon pants, she is not "picking and choosing" what to believe?
Another explanation for the condemnation of homosexuality in the Old Testament is that it was not uncommon for conquerors of the
ancient Near East to rape defeated kings or warriors to humiliate and punish them. Anal rape could have been what the author of Leviticus was condemning, not homosexual relations all together. The fact that a homosexual relationship between women was never condemned, let alone mentioned, in the Bible helps to prove this point.
The Bible should not form our country's laws. Are same-sex benefits and civil unions too much to ask for? They are equal rights, not special rights. Have Christians influenced our nation's legal system? I think so.
Paul Farran
Lawrence sophomore
Bible cannot be taken literally
Cody Marr's letter, "Christianity relevant today," (April 10) has a few good points but is missing something. Am I a devout Christian and have been all my life. I was raised in a Christian home, with a Christian family. However, I agree with Cody that you cannot take the Bible and the original beliefs so literally today. So many denominations take Bible verses so literally that they not only strive for unattainable perfection but also corrupt our society. Religion and church have turned into a competition among Christians. The church that has the biggest gym or television screen proves to be superior to other churches of the same denomination. Yet they still preach that the Bible is our map in life and we should take everything it says to heart. Nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about huge TVs and elaborate church programs to suck people in.
The Bible is a mere guide. But it is the only tangible thing Christians have to refer to today. Therefore it is still somewhat relevant.
I think Cody has a wrong perception of Christianity. Although the Bible has contradictions, it gives stories and parables that can help a person in his or her personal spiritual journey. For some, religion is a nice thing to hold on to, something warm and cuddly to turn to in hard times, but not everyone practices for that reason. Cody needs to realize that his passion against Christianity is shared inversely by Christians, and he should respect that. I hope Cody gets through to some denominations because they need to wake up. Good article, Cody, and good luck on your crusade.
Adam Bettis Maize High School junior
Abortion only choice for some
In regards to the letter "Feminists can oppose abortion" (Tuesday). I am also a strong, independent, opinionated woman, and I take issue with
many points raised by Ms. Pomeroy.
"How dare we tell a woman that her only choice in an unplanned pregnancy is abortion?" We don't. The very label "pro-choice" implies that we do not dictate what decision a woman makes about her pregnancy.
Of course abortion is a disturbing and painful experience! No one is proabortion! What Ms. Pomeroy and some other pro-lifers fail to realize is that criminalizing abortion will not stop it. It would merely make it unsafe, dirty, expensive and dangerous.
How can Ms. Pomeroy accuse women of murder in one sentence, then turn around in the next and say that they are not "morally deprived" by any means? I believe that most women who resort to abortions are doing so because they think they have no other choice. Ms. Pomeroy says "they are simply young women who have too often been told that there is no other way out for them." What does she suppose that criminalizing abortion would do? It would leave no safe way out for a woman who cannot (for whatever reason) continue to carry a pregnancy to term.
I wish we could all put aside this bitterness and work to safely and constantly reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. Imagine all the energy that goes into arguing about this topic. If all of it were deflected into working to educate women (and men!) about reproductive issues, prenatal care and responsible sexual behavior, we would see a decrease in abortions. This would surely please pro-life groups, while keeping it as an option if a woman feels that she has no other choice.
Madelaine Marchin Manhattan freshman
Chancellor must support sports
We wish Chancellor Hemenway would step in and show more support for the alumni and backers of swimming and tennis. When students and parents are asked to put up considerable amounts of money to keep their sons in school, then when they are forced to start a pledge campaign on their own to keep those two sports, it makes the backers feel as if they are on the outside of the KU community instead of being a part of the college.
Swimming and tennis have the support of parents and alumni of the two sports. Why can't Hemenway review those supportive actions and reconsider the elimination of those sports? Why can't he say "your efforts have demonstrated to me that I need to join in, make some phone calls and lend my support to saving swimming and tennis?"
It seems elementary. If the other nonrevenue sports asked their supporters to help, the task would
lessen.
We don't want conflict, we want support. We want to see the chancellor step up to the plate for those two sports and take a swing. If these student athletes leave to play their sports at other schools, the university will be poorer. Please, Chancellor Hemenway, take another book and join in.
Roger and Ann Gallagher Norman, Okla.
Minorities should earn money
As a National Merit Scholar, I am disappointed by Wednesday's editorial pushing for the development of minority scholarships with money from "Coke cash." A few of her arguments sounded pathetic — so for all of you open-minded people, try to be open-minded about this.
First, the editorial board wants the University of Kansas to fund minorities more. Why? Not because they've earned it (the ones who have earned it are already receiving money) but because there are fewer of them. I'm a white North Dakota freshman. There aren't many of me here. Thus, I'm underprivileged, a minority and deserve financial aid. If this sounds absurd, congratulations! You're on the road to understanding why minorities don't deserve financial aid simply because of their minority status.
Second, the editorial board claims the University gives few minorities National Merit Scholarships. This ridiculously implies discrimination. Our University doesn't decide who becomes merit scholars — the National Merit Scholarship Corp. does. This award is based mostly on PSAT scores, and every merit scholar is automatically offered full tuition and board (in a scholarship hall).
The editorial board claims that merit scholars come from privileged backgrounds and thus have a definite advantage. That's uninformed. I graduated with only 27 classmates. To quote Ms. Knight, my high school "taught from outdated textbooks [and] had no air conditioning inside [its] classrooms." There were no advanced placement classes offered, and thus the slightly more gifted students in classes were stuck learning at a snail's pace. But despite this obvious disadvantage, three students of the last 54 who graduated were merit scholars. This is not teachers, books or community, but rather natural gifts much like those of professional athletes.
Minorities can benefit from financial support. But that's not the state's duty — it's something wealthy minorities can and should institute. The University shouldn't be pressured to give money to minorities just because life doesn't seem fair at times.
Andrew Pull
Colfax, N.D., freshman
VIETNAM VETERANS FOR ACADEMIC REFORM-K11
Leonard Magruder - President presents DISCOVERING A LOST GOSPEL
An Interview with Prof. Paul Mirecki, Dept. Of Religious Studies-K.U.
Cable channel 19,7:30-8:00 pm Monday May 7 (tonight) and Monday May 14
Pregnant?
Birthright can help
1-800-550-4900
FREE AND CONFIDENTIAL
PREGNANCY TESTS AND REFERRALS
KJHK's
End of the Year Party
"DJ Battle"
Tues. May 8th@Liberty
Hall
9:30
$3.00 at the door
Your History Will Be Available In The Not-Too-Distant Future
If you ordered a Jayhawker Yearbook, it will be available May 16, 17 & 18 from noon-5 p.m. in the Kansas Union
EVERYTHING BUT ICE
BEDS • DESKS
CHEST OF DRAWERS
BOOK CASES
unclaimed freight &
damaged merchandise
936 Mass.
"Layaway now for summer"
W Hollywood Theaters
BARGAIN MATINEES INDICATED BY ()
STADIUM SEATING * ALL DIGITAL
1 Blow ¹²⁰¹ (1:20) 4:20, 7:20, 10:10
2 Town And Country* ¹²⁰¹ (1:30) 4:35, 7:35, 9:40
3 One Night At Coo's Cool* ¹²⁰¹ (1:30) 4:15, 7:30, 10:55
4 Spy Kids* ¹²⁰¹ (1:25) 4:25, 7:00, 9:20
5 Dhruven ¹²⁰¹ (1:15) 4:25, 7:10, 9:35
6 The Mummy Returns¹²⁰¹ (1:00) 4:00, 7:00, 9:55
7 The Mummy Returns²²⁰¹ (1:00) 4:30, 7:05, 10:15
8 Bridge Jones' Daryl¹²⁰¹ (1:40) 4:35, 7:05, 10:65
9 Crocodile Dudee in LA¹²⁰¹ (1:50) 4:50, 7:25, 9:25
10 Joe Doit¹²⁰¹ (2:00) 4:55, 7:45, 9:50
11 Along Came A Spider¹²⁰¹ (1:45) 4:45, 7:25, 10:50
12 For the Forsaken¹²⁰¹ (2:50) 5:00, 7:05, 10:35
PLAZA 6
Sat & Sun Daily
1 O Brother, Where Art Thou?n(1:55) 4:00; 7:45; 9:35
2 Someone Like Youn(2:00) 4:00; 7:10; 9:40
3 Chocolatn(1:45) 4:30; 7:00; 9:30
4 Josie And the Pussycatsn(1:55) 4:40; 7:10; 9:40
5 Freddy Got Fingered n(2:00) 4:15; 7:45;
6 Enemy At The Gates n (1:45) 4:30; 7:00; 9:30
Photo ID required for R movies