Letters

UCLA publications cause divisiveness

In addition to the Daily Bruin, which serves the entire student
body, UCLA has several student publications aimed at specific
groups defined by gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity and
religion. As a reader of one of these magazines, Fem, I know
they contain first-rate writing. However, I think these
publications may increase divisiveness in the long run.

How often do the Jews and Muslims on this campus read each
other’s magazines? Do people who are not of African
descent read Nommo? How many of the readers of Pacific Ties do
not identify themselves as Asians or Pacific Islanders?  When
a magazine explicitly targets a specific group, members of other
groups feel shut out, even if excluding them was not the
editors’ intent. On several occasions I’ve noticed
headlines in Pacific Ties and Al-Talib that made me want to read
the issue.  Being neither of Asian descent nor Muslim, I did
not.

These identity publications arose to provide a voice for members
of groups traditionally denied one. But times have
changed. The Daily Bruin publishes everybody’s views.
Our loyalties can no longer be to the one or two groups we joined
by accident of birth. We have to learn to see each other and
ourselves as human beings that are defined beyond simple
categorization.

Yevgenya Shevtsov First- year Ecology, Behavior and
Evolution

Catholics must be true to tradition

On April 9th, the Daily Bruin printed a brief editorial
concerning the recent allegations that priests are molesting
children (“Honest
leaders can save Catholic church,” Viewpoint, April 9).
There are two sentences in the editorial that are completely untrue
and irrelevant. They read: “Clearly the saint-like standards
to which priests are held, literally and figuratively, have proved
so daunting that hardly anyone is willing to be a priest these
days. If the church is unwilling to reconsider it’s stringent
policies on celibacy and female priests, it may find itself in an
even worse situation.” It is true that the number of
vocations to the priesthood in this country, Canada and Europe are
severely low. However, the seminaries in Africa, Asia and Latin
America are overflowing to the point where these new priests are
being sent to fill the vacancies in North America and Europe. Why
are vocations so high in these parts of the world where the church
holds priests to the same saint-like standards? The decline in
vocations to the priesthood is a phenomenon of the late 20th
century. Another phenomenon of the late 20th century is a greater
tendency for Catholic priests and lay Catholics in North America
and Europe to openly advocate disobedience to the Pope. These
Catholics, who call themselves reformists, advocate women priests,
married priests, non-traditional celebrations of the mass,
artificial contraception, divorce, abortion, etc. They also argue
that the church should change or else “find itself in an even
worse situation.” However, since these reformists have been
gaining popularity, the number of priests and nuns have dropped,
the number of young people identifying themselves as Catholics has
dropped and the divorce rate among Catholics has risen. Therefore,
the evidence suggests that the more we conform to tradition, the
more interest there will be in lay Catholicism and priests
vocations. The less traditional we are, the worse the situation
will become for Catholics. Celibacy and women priests have
absolutely nothing to do with the lack of vocations to the
priesthood.

Andres Chang Alumnus Class of 1999

Bush’s ban on stem cell research
short-sighted

Besides trying to win brownie points among those Republicans he
has recently alienated, the anti-choice lobby and the
pharmaceutical lobby that profits greatly from the selling of pain
drugs like Vioxx and Celebrex, President Bush sent a clear message
recently that he will stagnate the improvement of life today by
preventing scientific research (such as stem cell research)
because, in his grand paternalistic wisdom, President Bush believes
future generations are incapable of dealing with the ethics and
morality of a future he feels he can predict. What typical
paternalistic egotism the present generation exhibits with
President Bush and others of similar beliefs thinking they are
smarter than past presidents (and generations) and will be smarter
than any generation that follows him (and them), especially in
light of the fundamental evolution of science, ethics, and
morality. What poetic justice it will be if President Bush,
years or days from now, suffers from an ailment that could have
been cured but for his short-sighted, egotistical ban on research.
Maybe then he’ll realize existing human life is more
important than political pandering and hysteria.  

Ethan Greene Alumnus Class of 1999