Non-Division 1 football team wouldn’t work

Lucas Hagerty’s article “Give GW a football team” (Nov. 17, p. 4) addresses the idea of not having a Division 1 football team, to help reduce the costs associated with football. That would be a nice idea, if the NCAA didn’t mandate against playing at a lower level in other sports.

Perhaps some time with the library staff in Gelman on the concept of research would be of use to a first-semester freshman. Kyle Stingily, Junior

Glass ceiling far from shattered

In “The way through the glass ceiling,” (Nov. 17, p. 4) Niketa Brar describes Michelle Obama as an ideal role model for women in politics. However, she overlooks one key issue: Michelle Obama is not a politician.

By simply standing beside her husband and supporting him, she is hardly breaking through the glass ceiling. Yes, it’s wonderful that we will have a poised and polished first lady, but we can look toward many women for that – Laura Bush, for one.

In addition, Ms. Brar’s comments on Gov. Palin and Sen. Clinton simply perpetuate the negative cycle. With Palin being considered as one of the new faces of the Republican party and Clinton in talks to be our new secretary of state, perhaps we should focus now on their policies – not on their pantsuits and pumps.
Samantha Alessi, Alumna

Power to the people

It is frustrating to see so many people protesting against the passing of Proposition 8 (“Students rally against Proposition 8,” Nov. 17, p. 1).

My reasoning for this has nothing to do with my opinion on the matter, as I am a supporter of gay rights, but it has everything to do with the manner in which the protesters are approaching the new amendment.

Unfortunately for the protesters, I don’t believe that they have anything to complain about. This wasn’t an executive order that placed the proposition on the ballot. It was a citizen-initiated measure, which means that the citizens of California decided to put the measure up for the debate.

When Election Day came, there were over 500,000 more citizens who voted, in the fairest way we know possible, “yes” over “no” to ban gay marriage. The people of what is arguably the most liberal state in the union, California, spoke and stated that they don’t want gay marriage to be legal.

In an election that was based around the people finally getting their voices heard, it is ironic that the people who were demanding for everyone’s voices to be recognized are now upset about an issue that was decided democratically. Unfortunately, these protesters do not realize that they are not protesting an amendment – they are protesting democracy. In my eyes, that is plain wrong.
Eric Lane, Sophomore

Be more serious, liberals

I am in continued disbelief of many liberals on campus.

First, you have the disproportionate response by many at GW who called Andrew Clark a “closeted homosexual” and a hate-mongerer for his column “I voted yes on Prop 8” (Nov. 17, p. 4).

Clark wrote a well thought-out response to a complicated question. The truth about gay marriage is that it was up for vote in 30 states this election. In every single one of these states, it was voted down, meaning a ban on gay marriage was either reinstated, continued or introduced.

This wasn’t a condemnation on the gay lifestyle, and to compare it to the civil rights movement is utterly offensive. Homosexuals are not being denied the right to vote, nor did they have to endure years of slavery to achieve it. Many straight couples would be fine with gay couples receiving the same rights as them. They simply feel that marriage should refer to a man and woman.

This isn’t hate. This isn’t being a closeted homosexual. This is stating an opinion. My feeling, and as it appears, the feeling of the nation is that people are more likely to support civil unions than marriage.

Next, we have Evan Schwartz’s “Let’s not be trigger-happy” column (Nov. 20, p. 4). Schwartz states that the Second Amendment needs regulation, meaning gun control should be stricter. My fundamental disagreement with this argument is simple: Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.

It’s not a problem that people have guns, it’s a problem that they have fallen into irresponsible hands and nobody is there to enforce gun laws. We have a right to carry guns, granted to us in the Constitution.

Liberals have got to get more rational when it comes to facing society’s problems. You don’t need to call everyone who disagrees with gay marriage a hate-filled homophobe. Nor do you need to strike an amendment from the Constitution. There are rational ways to face society’s issues, and now it’s time to figure them out.
John Voci, Senior