Letters to the Editor

Defense of Bible fails to add up

I can only assume that the editors of the Daily Bruin were
trying to stir up controversy by publishing Ginger Kapalka’s
“Read the Bible’s spirit, not facts” (Nov. 27),
because it is one of the worst defenses of the Bible I have ever
seen.

First, Kapalka unequivocally denies the suggestion that errors
and deliberate changes have been gradually introduced into the
Bible.

Even if she were right in that the Bible we have today agrees
entirely with the oldest available manuscripts, the Bible she is
familiar with is just an English translation of the original
compilation.

So much for the true word of God.

But this is irrelevant for Kapalka.

“Simply reading and memorizing passages built my faith in
the Bible,” Kapalka said.

Wouldn’t it be nice if all things worked this way?

I have memorized the lyrics to “Forgot About Dre.”
Should this convince me that their words are irrefutable and that
Dr. Dre and Eminem are arsonists and murderers?

Kapalka also dismisses the notion that parts of the Bible are
obsolete.

I assume she is not counting the parts of the Bible that say
blasphemers, disobedient children, people who work on the Sabbath
and adulteresses should be stoned to death.

Let’s face it: Kapalka is not really defending the
unexpurgated content of the Bible.

She is merely plucking out its most positive messages.

It’s time we cut out the middleman.

Let’s be honest with ourselves and realize that we
don’t need an archaic book to tell us to be kind to our
neighbors.

Alan Jern

Fourth-year, computer science

Tasers especially dangerous for some

As students with or having knowledge of disabilities and chronic
health conditions, we are deeply troubled by the use of a Taser on
a student who declared he had a medical condition.

We acknowledge the possibility that university police believed
the student was lying in order to stop the electric shocks;
however, we do not believe this is a safe assumption to make.

Regardless of what health issues Mostafa Tabatabainejad may
have, we are concerned with the willingness of university police to
continue using a Taser on a student without regard for the medical
risks involved.

People who have heart conditions, neurological or seizure
disorders and a number of other disabilities or chronic health
conditions are very vulnerable to permanent or fatal harm from the
electric shocks administered by Tasers.

The idea that Tasers and other such techniques are harmless
presumes people are both healthy and able-bodied.

We call on both UCLA and university police to at least establish
stringent restrictions on the use of Tasers based on their
potential to cause serious injury or death.

We appreciate the efforts of students, community members and
campus groups in confronting this incident.

Many of us share concerns about civil liberties, racial
profiling and racial bias ““ in addition to disability ““
with respect to police enforcement.

We must critically examine how effectively police are keeping
our community safe.

If we provide police with an unquestioned scope of discretion,
we cede our civil liberties, personal dignity and, paradoxically,
our own safety to them.

Beth Ribet,

Muhtarat Agoro,

Naomi Bebo,

Malinda Lee,

Claudia Pena,

UCLA law students