VOL. LIII, NO. 112
California State University, Long Beach May 1, 2003
.
ADVERTISEMENT


     
 
 
 


Editorial Staff

Kimberly Pasquis
Editor in Chief

Rachelle Youngman
Managing Editor

Miguel Lopez
News Editor

Sonya Smith
Assistant News Editor

Justin Dimert
City Editor

Franklin Holman
Assistant City Editor

Tina Page
Opinion Editor

Jack Schneider
Diversions Editor

Todd Leland
Sports Editor

Brian Brannon
Photo Editor

Johnathan Cook
Chief Photo Editor

Michael Watanabe
Make-Up Editor

Chris Burnett
News Editorial Director

Gerard Greenidge
Webmaster

Manlo Ngai
Graphic Designer

 

. News  
 

Letters to the editor


Zero tolerance laws inconsistent

Monica Pardee makes a strong case for drug courts in her April 22 op-ed. For non-violent offenders with chronic substance abuse problems, drug treatment is a cost-effective alternative to incarceration. Unfortunately, drug courts are being misused for political purposes.
 
Record numbers of Americans arrested for marijuana possession have been forced into treatment by the criminal justice system. The resulting distortion of treatment statistics are then used by drug czar John Walters to make the claim that marijuana is “addictive.”
 
Zero tolerance drug laws do not distinguish between occasional use and chronic abuse. The coercion of Americans who prefer marijuana to martinis into taxpayer-funded treatment centers says a lot about U.S. government priorities, but absolutely nothing about the relative harms of marijuana. For an objective take on marijuana, look to Canada.
 
In the words of Senator Pierre Claude Nolin, “Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicates that cannabis is substantially less harmful than alcohol and should be treated not as a criminal issue but as a social and public health issue.”
 
Students who want to help end the intergenerational culture war otherwise known as the war on some drugs should contact Students for Sensible Drug Policy at www.ssdp.org.
 
— Robert Sharpe, M.P.A.,
program officer,
Drug Policy Alliance

Criticism is not anti-american

In his April 22 letter to the editor, Jason Garthoffner claimed that he is appalled by D. Tran’s hate for this country after Tran wrote a sensational article criticizing the U.S. Army’s consistent record of being more racially diverse than the American population.
 
I thought that we had agreed at the Associated Students Inc. town hall meeting a month ago not to personally attack each other. Like Jason, I disagree with Tran on some of the issues he brought up — Tran  could be wrong, but I would never say he hates this country. I think he just hates oppression wherever it is, including in Iraq under
 
Saddam and, as he claims, here by the U.S. government.
 
If I criticize the U.S. government and you call me anti-American, then this only means that the criticism is true and instead of conceding that you are wrong, you attack my character like a slick politician.
 
Since when is criticism un-American?  Saddam was calling Iraqis that criticized him un-Iraqi and unpatriotic. Yet, there are a lot of Americans who have slipped into the same rhetorical trap and assumed that disagreeing with the government is unpatriotic.
 
I personally do not know any better form of patriotism than criticism. Out of my love for this country and my belief in the values and fundamentals for which we stand, I criticize and disagree to make sure that my government is on the right track. After all, if it was not for the critical thinking of a few rich aristocratic white men whose criticism of the government led them to do the right thing, our country would not be here today.
 
Do not jump to conclusions and start making judgments about my political views.  Do not start slandering me as another one of those dumb liberals as Gerry Wachovsky would probably assume I was. Please actually listen to my criticism. We all share the same goals, motivations and American values, but we often disagree on the course of action. Think of me as your American brother who is just as concerned as you are about our country. If you do that, then we can have a civil debate.

— Usama Kahf,
treasurer of the CSULB Speech & Debate Team,
senior in finance

Monastery threatened

I am a monk with the Ramakrishna Monastery here in Trabuco Canyon. When visitors come here they feel close to something that is indefinable, something very close to their heart, for me I define it as the presence of God.
 
Environmental impact statements do not take into account the spiritual environment. People can acquire great wealth in destroying the sacred, by building great luxury homes, but if one heart is empty, without love then one has nothing.
 
As many of you know, we are fighting the county of Orange and the developer of a project called Saddleback Meadows that are threatening to destroy the tranquilly and sanctity of our monastery. So why has God placed us in this situation at odds with this developer and the county? For me it is to learn to love them, because they are manifestations of God.
 
However, we still must fight them and do everything in our power to stop them. They will use everything at their disposal to defeat us and they are stronger and have more money, but they cannot defend themselves against our love.

— William (“Wil”) Divine,
Ramakrishna Monastery


Calendar

Display Ads

Front Page

univmag

 

Sports

.... The Pyramid to host NCAA Final Four

.... 49ers head to UCLA, then Big West Championship

.... Dirtbags will need Freshmen to win

.... Four 49ers awarded All-conference honors

ADVERTISEMENT


.
©2002 Daily Forty-Niner. All rights reserved