|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rice Thresher
Phone:
|
'Thresher' should not run offensive ad To the editor: I am writing to express my dismay at your decision to publish an ad in the miscellaneous section of the paper asking for an egg donor of specific racial features and of acceptable IQ range: a blue-eyed and blonde donor. I hope that the Thresher does not accept this ad in the future, as it is offensive to the rest of us who imagine that children, and people for that matter, are to be valued regardless of their racial markers and scores on intelligence tests. Even in the ad section, the paper must exercise judgment about what is acceptable to print. It seems to me that the Thresher made a poor decision to publish an ad that echoes disturbingly of the eugenics movement.
Jae Chung Anthropology graduate student
Abortion letter ignores rights of unborn child To the editor: Kristin Necessary's letter ("Abortion column contains faulty logic," Feb. 2) has hit on the central question of the abortion debate - one that often gets submerged in side issues and tangents. There are many statements I disagree with in her letter. However, I will restrict myself to the one I feel is most important. Necessary's letter states that "We don't allow children legal choice (in contracts, voting, etc.) until age 18. The choice being protected is the mother's." If we deny that children have rights in deciding whether to live or die simply because they don't have legal rights "in contracts, voting, etc.," then we have fallen far from our calling as a humanitarian nation. What kind of nation doesn't protect its weakest citizens? Necessary has reached the unfortunate conclusion of the pro-choice movement, which is to propose that, as a people, we should have the choice to rid ourselves of inhibitions, whether those be human or not. We see evidence of our nation's desire for such a horrendous freedom not only in the case of abortion, but also in the increasing instances of infanticide, legal executions and the push for euthanasia, not to mention other social ills which should be considered life issues. These include the relegation of the elderly to nursing homes, the marginalization of the mentally disabled and, perhaps most obviously, the degradation of the poor. While I appreciate the pro-choice movement's strong humanitarian stand for women's rights, I challenge those within it to consider abortion in the light of global humanism rather than as an exclusively woman's issue. As a society, we absolutely must protect those who cannot protect themselves. Thus, the central question - the only question the abortion debate can truly be distilled to - is, "Is the fetus a human life?" If so, a humanitarian society must protect that life as the most vulnerable of its citizens. I am convinced that both science and the common sense of a three-year-old demonstrate that the fetus is indeed a human being. If anyone can prove the error of that conviction, I will gladly fight for the rights of any woman to choose an abortion.
Julia Ebner Hanszen '98
Drilling in Alaska will not solve oil problems To the editor: Many years ago, when I was still teaching Geology 101, a student asked me: "Dieter, give me one good reason why I might take this course." I answered, "To become a better voter." The student asked, "How so?" My answer was, "Because you will then begin to understand when politicians are trying to BS you on mineral resources." So, here is yet another administration (George W. Bush) which posits that more exploration and drilling will alleviate our dependence on foreign crude. I remember that this was the mantra when the drilling in Alaska began, yet all of the oil from that state has not stopped our dependence on foreign crude. Listen carefully. The only way to erase our dependence on foreign crude, at least transiently, is to wage war against some or all OPEC states, occupy these, then pump and export their oil ourselves. Of course, I do not advocate that policy.
Dieter Heymann Professor emeritus Geology and Geophysics
Registrar discusses future goals, changes To the editor: Thank you for the interview this past week with Olivia Allison and the opportunity to share my thoughts and ideas with members of the Rice community. I do need to clarify some of the statements indicated as to my ideas and suggestions for enhancements of the registration process. While I do think priority registration is a good idea to help the registration procedure at Rice, I also want to think about continuous registration and add/drop. These are ideas I would like the university to consider in future long-range planning. Much input is needed from students, faculty and staff to determine if there is an interest for me to pursue this on behalf of the university. The current procedure for preregistration for the following semester is for students to drop off their registration forms in the Registrar's Office at any time during a one-week period. It is a first come, first served type of procedure. One of my ideas for improvement is to increase the number of days to preregister from one week to "continuously" up until the deadline for adding courses (this is currently at the end of the second week of the semester). This will give the students more time to think about the courses they want to take, have adequate time to meet with their advisers and make changes, additions, deletions, etc., if necessary. The current system does not provide that capability. Once you submit your registration form to the Registrar's Office, you cannot make any changes until the first week of the semester. This past year, enhancements were made to the registration process. Fall 2000 preregistration results were mailed to their home address two weeks before the start of the semester. Spring 2001 preregistration results were mailed just before the Christmas holidays. Traditionally, Rice students would not receive a copy of their schedule until they returned to campus. Providing students with this schedule in advance of the start of the semester assured the students of their requested courses and identified omissions to their attention; thus, they were able to rectify the situation and make the appropriate changes before the start of the semester. Allison and I discussed the idea of priority registration using the current approved time frame for Fall 2001 preregistration indicated in the Spring 2001 calendar as an example. Perhaps I wasn't clear with Allison on my thoughts of what a potential scenario may be for priority registration. It was never my intention to give students only one morning or afternoon to submit their schedule. My idea is to schedule this priority during a two- or three-week time period. I agree with your editorial that it would be ridiculous for a student to be forced into one morning or afternoon time slot. That is indeed unfair. It is true that procedures should not be designed or developed around what other colleges or universities around the country are doing; however, not having a majority of courses with an enrollment cap makes it difficult to schedule courses into classrooms. Additionally, the problem that occurs is that many courses can be scheduled into a room that is not adequate since the final registration count has not been determined. The idea of enrollment caps on courses does not change the flexibility a student has during the registration process to secure the best possible schedule. It will require the faculty member to determine if there is physical space in the classroom for the additional student(s). If the faculty member wants to change to a bigger room, every attempt will be made to accommodate this request. It does help in the assignments of rooms. There is confusion during the first week or two of the semester with room assignments and that process needs immediate improvement. I am actively working toward improving the process and providing better customer service to the students and faculty. Although there was great improvement by assigning courses into rooms several weeks before this semester began, more work in this area needs to be done. I am only suggesting ideas for improvement of the "overall" registration and scheduling processes. Implementation will only be done with the support of the students, faculty and administration. Later this month and early next month, I am planning to meet with students and invite all interested parties to these meetings to let me know their views. And, yes, things will get better once we get to online registration and I am glad to say we are on track to get to that endeavor - hopefully this year or as soon as possible. We want to be sure that, on balance, any change benefits students.
Jerry Montag Registrar
- back - |
|
|
Search the Thresher pages:
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of: The Rice Thresher, Rice University MS-524, PO Box 1892, Houston, TX 77251-1892, USA. The Thresher Online Project -- ethresh@listserv.rice.edu |
