School merger would not solve anything
I must indicate that I both applaud and commend Hannah Anderson for her proposal to merge Southern and LSU, though I do not completely agree.
Southern became a traditionally black college because African Americans founded it and not because many black students choose to go there, which is the same way LSU became known traditionally as a white college being founded by Caucasians.
I also know several black students at LSU, me being one, as well as white students at Southern, and I am not offended whatsoever by being compared to Token on South Park. Token is somewhat a misfit among the whole South Park gang and is never even given any good lines.
As a part of the minority here at LSU, it is quite easy to find yourself facing a situation where you may feel or seem like a misfit, per say, in a class of approximately 150 where you are the only black.
I do not recognize Anderson as being blind to cultural diversity at all. I see her as recognizing the subject for what it is and taking a step at diversifying what has been seen as a black and a white school for so many years. I too see an overabundance of different ethnic backgrounds everyday, especially here at LSU.
And in truth, as a black student here, I feel just as likely to be a victim of racism as any white student may feel at Southern. It is one thing to be opinionated, but do not try to speak for everyone when you truly do not know everyone”s feelings. The only thing that history has taught me is that everything repeats itself unless we as a people do something to prevent or change it.
So you ask, what would combining these two schools accomplish? I do know that Southern is one of the premier universities being that it has one of the best law, engineering, and nursing schools in the nation and is only striving to uphold its image. So it seems to me that combining these two colleges would not hurt LSU at all, but help to better it in a sense. Each university would only gain something from the opposing one.
A student choosing to attend any organization, no matter what type, takes many factors into deliberation. How can one say that a black college is no different than a college that appeals to different religions without saying that a college known for 80 years as a white college, being that LSU was founded in 1878, up until the federal courts ordered the first admittance of black undergraduates to LSU in 1958, according to the Chronology of the Modern Civil Rights Movement in New Orleans, was also no different than a college that appealed to different religions.
I am more than happy that LSU seems to be working on becoming a more diverse university in more ways than one, but it was never said or written that a college like Southern appealed to any race besides the black race. According to the POLSC 341 Constitutional Law: Civil Rights Moots Court Assignment, Southern just like the other HBCUs was built to provide education for young blacks who were denied admittance to white universities.
Any student, no matter what color or race, is allowed to enter the college as long as they achieve on his or her ACT exam.
Also, if a university is attempting to excel in the collegiate academic community it must not only be careful about the students it admits but also about the thousands of students that were already admitted to the university when the admission requirements were much lower.
However, not everyone, no matter the ethnic background, can or chooses to attend a college for an assortment of different reasons. Those who do, from my viewpoint, are blessed to have the chance no matter it be a two-year, four-year, black, or white college.
As a black student at LSU, I did not choose to attend this university due to my more than excellent grades and test scores leaving high school. Rather, I chose LSU because it was a much larger university than Southern which would make me only a number. This way I could not only strive to reach my own identity in a population of about 33,000, but I could also face the challenge of continuing to get great grades and high test scores being a minority with so many of the majority.
So yes, why have a mediocre school, when both colleges seem to be accomplishing more than enough for itself and also to be keeping Louisiana standing strong academically as a state with two top, well-known, champion standing universities.
Markee Baltazar
Sophomore
Biological Sciences
In-depth stories beneficial to students
I would like to thank the Reveille for the recent In-Depth articles on the Flagship Agenda.
Tracy Simoneaux, Jaci Cole and Lauren Wilbert did an excellent job of examining the objectives and methods behind the LSU”s plan for the next six years and I hope that students took the chance to read about where this university is heading.
So often as students we get caught up in day-to-day college life and miss the larger understanding of where this University is going.
We see only the immediate consequence of a decision but usually neglect to think about the ultimate results.
The inevitable fact is that your diploma from LSU is equal to the worth of LSU at that moment.
So the progress that LSU makes is not only good for this University, but for alumni, current students, future students and the State of Louisiana as a whole.
I think that the three articles did an outstanding job explaining the issues at hand, the progress that we, as a University, have made so far and the things that still need to be accomplished.
Things are changing at LSU — they are changing for the better and changing quickly.
We should all be proud of what this university has done so far and look forward to a bright tomorrow.
So get involved, do what you can and together we, as a University, will move toward national prominence in all we do.
Michael Tipton
Junior
History & Political Science
Free Speech Alley should be for students
The irony of my letter is that I”m hoping for a restriction of Free Speech in Free Speech Alley. As a third year student, I”ve grown tired of the insults and screams directed toward students by people with no business on campus.
The history of Free Speech Alley is rich in tradition. It served as a forum of political debate and as an area where students could voice their opinions.
Many famous and infamous alumnae have used these grounds as a training ground for future careers in politics.
Now, Free Speech Alley is a joke. These religious zealots have made a great tradition into a terrible rite of passage for each freshman that receives their first insult.
I do understand that their faith compels them to witness to others the doctrine of their religion. However, if a God exists, God would see that the ranting and raving is ineffective in spreading the message.
Tell me, has anyone stopped and contemplated, ‘Well gee, maybe I am a heathen.’ You can”t argue or have ‘formal discussion’ with these men because they refuse to acknowledge but one truth.
You can”t ask them to empirically substantiate their claims and beliefs because to them, their faith is factual. I hate to say it, but all of them are intellectual inferiors to each and every one of our beer chugging student population. Their denial of secular knowledge keeps them from having to argue with any of us logically which is ironic since we”re here at LSU to acquire secular knowledge.
It is clear to me those non-students have no business in a student tradition. We need to reclaim our stake. I want to see the College Republicans vs. College Democrats, SG vs. the student body on neutral grounds, etc. Until we take it back, we are subject to the abuse and verbal assaults from non-students. So if the University wants to nurture an environment of verbal abuse and intolerance, then by all means continue to let these non-students proclaim that we all will suffer eternal damnation. Besides, those little kids are too innocent to be exploited.
Duc Due Vu
Junior
Political Science and Religion
Constitution cannot be used to discriminate
Democracy, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is defined as: ‘a government by the people; especially rule of the majority … the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges.’
My focus in this letter is on the latter of Mr. Webster”s definitions of democracy.
As a nation that prides itself as a world leader of democracy and equality for all people, I find it absurd that the leader of this country should feel the need to constitutionally amend the rights of a certain group of people.
Over the past few weeks there has been much activity regarding the issue of same-sex marriages.
In light of the more recent events taking place in San Francisco, President Bush has decided it would be in this country”s best interest to constitutionally declare marriage as a union between a woman and a man.
By doing so, certain rights for LGBT citizens of this country will be revoked. With this Constitutional Amendment, it will legally be said that all ÊLGBT citizens are second class.
In a statement released on Tuesday to the Associated Press, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat from San Francisco said, “Never before has a constitutional amendment been used to discriminate against a group of people, and we must not start now.”
I agree that the Constitution should not be used to discriminate against a group of people. By all means, the sole purpose of the U.S. Constitution is to protect the rights of all individuals. If the only reason marriage is to be protected is because of its ‘sanctity’ and as a ‘holy sacrament,’ then why do we talk of removing the words ‘under God’ from the Pledge of Allegiance?
Why is it unconstitutional for God to be included in public schools in any way, shape, or form if God and religion seems to be the basis on which President Bush is pushing to outlaw same-sex marriages? This country was founded on the stance of separation between church and state. Our founding fathers formed this democracy to forbid the states and the nation from saying what was right and wrong according to religious beliefs.
Jennifer Vitter and Jennifer Fleming
Junior, Senior
Mechanical Engineering, Biological Sciences