The Rice Thresher

Location: http://the.ricethresher.org/opinion/2005/10/28/letters_to_the_editor

October 28, 2005 > Opinion > Letters to the editor

Letters to the editor

Thresher misstates IT budget situation

To the editor:

In response to the unsigned editorial in last week’s Thresher (“How IT should spend $10 million on students,” Oct. 21): There may be some factual clarifications that would ensure a productive conversation about how Information Technology can be most responsive to student needs.

At present, the entire IT division’s operating budget for the current fiscal year is just over $10 million. These funds are used to support the computing needs of students, faculty and staff throughout the campus. This budget also supports all major computing expenses such as network connections, hardware and software for departments, college labs and classrooms and funding replacement costs of new equipment as well as maintenance and support expenses.

Last year, IT upgraded the instructional technology in 52 classrooms, 9 colleges and 10 labs in addition to upgrading projectors in 17 classrooms. Currently, IT is leading a $22-million capital project to upgrade and replace the computing network infrastructure campus-wide. This project includes rewiring the campus, enhancing the wireless capabilities, replacing the computing core and significantly upgrading the university’s data backup and storage capabilities. Expected to be completed in 18 months, the new network will alleviate the access and speed issues raised in the editorial.

Work is also underway on building a new data center facility to meet the growing needs of the campus.

We invite any inquiries, discussions and suggestions concerning IT projects and activities. No one from the Thresher staff spoke with IT management to verify what $10 million was being referred to in the editorial. To continue the dialogue with the student body on campus, representatives from IT attended a Student Association forum Oct. 24.

Kamran Khan Vice Provost for Information Technology Editor’s note: See erratum, left.

Faulty faith columns should not be printed

To the editor:

It’s been years since words on a page have raised my blood pressure the way Daniel Wang’s guest column did last week (“God’s love, forgiveness provide absolute truth,” Oct. 21). This, however, is the only praise I can attribute to his article.

The overarching absolutism of his claims was appalling. Upon reading his assertion that the Bible is a “source of absolute truth,” I uttered a cry of disbelief. Whose Bible is the writer talking about?

Considering they are not written in English and that translations are often constested, he could not have been referring to the Torah or the Koran — and nor could he have been referring to my own Bible. Basing one’s opinions solely on the Bible has become taboo precisely because it is not a universal source of truth. Almost every denomination has a different form of the Bible and to deem one’s own as “God’s word and absolute truth” is precisely what he protests being labeled as: “intolerant and arrogant.”

People are entitled to believe what they like, but to claim their own religious view as infallible and proceed to push their religious beliefs upon others — more specifically, to use the medium of the student newspaper — is completely uncalled for.

The intention of this article was to make readers feel uncomfortable for their sins. Perhaps my view of a sin is different from Wang’s. I’m assuming he doesn’t keep kosher. I wouldn’t expect him to feel ashamed, just as I shouldn’t be expected to feel guilty for that which I don’t view as a sin.

Religion, or lack thereof, is a personal choice and should be kept as such. I fear a prospective student may have chanced upon a copy of last week’s paper. What image are we sending by broadcasting one student’s (in my opinion, extremist) religious views in our secular newspaper? I kindly request that in the future the Thresher keep articles grounded in faith out of our student periodical.

Laura Shepard Sid freshman

Prop. 2 text could

affect all marriages#

To the editor:

Last week, Katy Mulvaney gave one reason why all religious Texans should vote against Proposition 2 (“Catholics must oppose secular Amendment 2,” Oct. 21). Here is another: The very language of the bill itself would jeopardize all marriages in Texas, whether straight or gay.

You see, the legislators who wrote the bill left out a few important words. They wrote that (a) “marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman,” and (b) “this state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.” Since (b) prohibits recognition of anything identical to (a), that means heterosexual marriage could not be recognized in Texas.

Other states have carefully worded their anti-gay marriage amendments to speak of not recognizing “other” unions, or denying marriage rights to “unmarried couples.” The Texas legislature is apparently so inept that they can’t even screw gay people correctly.

Of course, I’m sure our legislators wrote it that way unwittingly, but that doesn’t mean a nasty divorce lawyer, a greedy insurance company or one of those infamous liberal activist judges won’t try to interpret the law that way. No matter how people vote on the amendment, gay couples still won’t have marriage rights, so voters can rest easy knowing they’re not also risking straight marriage if they vote “no” on Proposition 2.

Max Starkenburg Hanszen ‘03

Kudos, students for not stopping at sunset

To the editor:

I would like to applaud all of the night owls at Rice who press on well into the evening, be it for work or play. On a trip from a class in the Rice Media Center to Fondren Library Oct. 18, I saw a powderpuff practice, a group of six students on the Wiess College trampoline, a student doing laundry, a game of frisbee catch at Hanszen College, several large groups of students walking between the colleges, two different dance practices, a dozen students lounging around outside, one group of four students headed to the racquetball courts, students watching a movie in a Humanities Building classroom, a Bible-study group and at least two dozen students working on the first floor of Fondren — all at 10:30 p.m.

Viva la noche.

Jack Hardcastle Wiess senior Wiess president

End of article

Back to top