Dining made effort to remedy problem
Last Friday, I wrote a letter to The Daily Reveille addressing certain problems in the LSU Mini-Mart. This is not a retraction letter. I stand by what I said.
However, since I wrote that letter, the Mini-Mart Dining supervisor immediately took actions to investigate my claims and attempted to right them.
From what I have been told, these wrongs have been righted. I appreciate the effort put forth by the LSU Dining staff.
As I stated in the previous letter, I love being here at LSU, and this is one of the many reasons I do. If there is a problem on campus, the staff and faculty will do everything possible to make students’ experience here better.
Thank you, LSU Dining, for taking my opinions to heart and working on them.
Zach Fostersophomore, music education
Abortion victims need legal protection
Ms. Pleasant, though I agree with you that the tactics of the demonstrators were unfortunate, I ardently disagree with your article Friday. No one would argue that rape, murder and child abuse are great evils; though, not everyone sees abortion as a bad thing. According to the CDC, in 2003, there were 848,163 abortions in the U.S. (excluding West Virginia, New Hampshire and California). This means that, conservatively, each state had 16,900 human lives ended by doctors who swore to “first do no harm.” This number is roughly nine times that of rapes and murders in Louisiana combined in 2005. Also, the victims are children in the most vulnerable stage of life. For the evils you described, there are laws and institutions to protect the victims and prosecute the criminals. No such defense exists for these babies. This is why abortion is such a big deal.
Caston Robinsonsophomore, creative writing
Global warming important issue
Jonathan Lo admitted that he was generalizing in his April 27 article bashing environmentalists, but he didn’t admit that his argument was completely unfounded. Not to mention his logical fallacies and pretentious language make it hard to figure out what he’s even trying to say. And by the way, Greenpeace is just one environmental group out of hundreds, and it is irrational to judge and criticize them all based on one of the most extreme examples. Jonathan makes an outrageous claim that “environmentalism’s general goals are misguided” when he obviously doesn’t know what the goals even are. I would define them as belief in a “sustainable and responsible management of the planet’s resources.” Which is what Jonathan says he “firmly believe[s] in.” Just like Laurie David said at the StopGlobalWarming performance, everyone is an environmentalist, whether you call yourself one or not – even you, Mr. Lo. Further, he criticizes “environmentalists” who don’t have a scientific background. I’d like to direct Jonathan and anyone else who thinks that leaders for social progress have to be scholars in the field to Woodrow Wilson’s 19th century speech, “Leaders of Men,” where he carefully explains the differences between researchers and leaders and says for people to be moved to action, leaders must have a “broad and obvious argument…very absolutely put.” For this reason, I applaud the message of the “StopGlobalWarming” tour and Laurie and Sheryl’s use of a Natural Resource Defense Council expert on hand to help them field questions from the LSU audience. Laurie and Sheryl aren’t claiming to be scientists or experts, they just have a message to get across. They’ll use music, jokes, incentives, passion, concern, and anything else they can come up with to express their message and to move people to action.
Jonathan’s most serious fallacy, however, was using the Genetically Modified food example to defend his claim that environmentalists “unequivocal opposition to certain technologies.”
Genetic engineering is an issue that environmental groups express concern about, but it is by no means a focus. It is a top Greenpeace campaign, but it is not even in the Sierra Club’s top 10 important campaigns. On the contrary to Jonathan’s ridiculous generalization, environmentalists are some of the strongest supporters of new technologies, especially in the renewable energy field: alternative fuels, solar power, wind power. Other areas of interest to the environmental movement are organic farming, green architecture, mass transit, pollution controls, etc.
Don’t worry, I get my information from reputable sources; check out Nature magazine, Energy, Environment, and Development by Jose Goldemberg, Eco-Economy by Lester Brown, the Stern Review, IPCC climate change reports, even The Economist.
Jonathan Lo has clearly demonstrated, in the words of Woodrow Wilson, “the perennial misunderstanding between the men who write and the men who act.” Not to worry, though, the environmental movement is gaining momentum and new leaders every day, and we don’t need approval from writers like Jonathan Lo to act for and lead people toward a more sustainable society.
Lauren Stuartjunior, economics