The Rice Thresher

Location: http://the.ricethresher.org/opinion/2005/03/25/letters_to_the_editor

March 25, 2005 > Opinion > Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor

Post-break Sunday meal not ‘paid for’

To the editor: In response to the staff editorial pertaining to meal service on the Sunday evening after spring break (‘Spring break returnees deserve Sunday dinner,’ March 18), I would like to provide an explanation. Several meals that fall around the break are not included in the meal contract. Records indicate that less than half of the students on campus participate in meal service prior to and following the breaks. The meal provided on Sunday after spring break was advertised as a ‘complimentary snack box,’ and that is all we intended for it to be. Sunday dinner, March 13, was not in the meal plan contract; therefore, it is inaccurate to say you ‘paid for it.’

Housing and Dining has an extensive emergency preparedness plan that includes a substantial inventory of nonperishable, ready-to-eat meals, which can be easily distributed in an emergency situation. In order to maintain the freshness of these meals, it is necessary to rotate our inventory and distribute them as snack packs after a recess or at a study break. We feel that it is in your best interest that we continue to purchase and rotate our emergency food supply on a regular basis.

Housing and Dining is committed to providing full meal service for all meals outlined in the Campus Housing Agreement.

Julie Bogar Residential college dining manager Housing and Dining

Lacrosse penalties teach wrong lesson##

To the editor: While most of us agree that the Dec. 3 lacrosse party reflects a lapse in judgment, I believe last week’s letter (‘Leebron’s lacrosse decision pro-student,’ March 18) misses the point of why the administration’s decision was out of line.

I personally do not believe that the lacrosse party in question involved the actual forcing of students to drink dangerous amounts of alcohol, but let’s say for argument’s sake that it did. The last time I checked, we are all college students who make important decisions every day on our own that can have beneficial or detrimental consequences.

Many of us have been pressured many times to drink by various people. And yes, sometimes by leaders of campus groups of which we are members. The point is, we should all be ultimately responsible for the consequences of our own actions.

Rice is an educational institution (and a damn good one at that), yet we are failing to teach our students the fundamentals of being a human being. While we might graduate from here having mastered problem sets and sonnets, under this current administrative atmosphere, it is unlikely that we will be prepared for the reality that lies beyond the hedges. In the real world, it is not the person who asks you to drink that gets in trouble when you choose to do so. To punish the lacrosse captains so severely for the actions of intelligent adults who are capable of independent thought seems at the least unfair, if not absolutely ludicrous.

Jennifer Wessel Brown junior

Christianity presented incorrectly by writer

To the editor: I agree with Apoorva Shah: A true spiritual understanding transcends a blind practice of ‘old-time religion’ (‘Students need spirituality, not just old-time religion,’ March 18). Shah’s column, however, raised many key points that I would not leave unaddressed. Shah rebukes the conception of a ‘world of right versus wrong,’ an ontological outlook shared by many. But for many other believers on campus (we’re all believers in something), life is a matter of the absolute, of righteousness and sin, and it’s a valid and personal belief, rather than a traditionalistic religious obligation.

Reading his association of religion with war and belligerence and his suggestion of spiritual ‘insecurities,’ it saddens me to think that the Christian faith has been so misrepresented to Shah and others by the Christian religiosity. As it should be, Christian outreach is meant as a reflection of God’s love and compassion; it’d be much easier for us to validate our beliefs and battle insecurities by containing our practice in our dorms and conceding a relativistic biblical interpretation than to challenge our personal faith by sharing a truth we believe to be absolute and universally needed. While Shah asserts that ‘we cannot homogenize spirituality,’ I sincerely hope he won’t homogenize my faith into a ‘self-righteous creed,’ and I encourage everyone to consider the Christian faith on its own terms, rather than as a right-wing faction.

I realize my letter cannot represent all Christians on campus. Rather than retaliating with indignation, I invite anyone to find me: I’d be happy to further discuss with you and to listen with the open mind that I assure you some Christians have.

Matt Dunn Martel freshman

End of article

Back to top