Gelato not new to Bloomington\nRegarding the article "Gelato comes to College Mall" (IDS, Jan. 14), I think it is about time that IDS reporters widen their views in their very own neighborhood. Unlike it says in the article, The Gelato Shop in College Mall is not unique in Indiana. There has been a cafe right here in Bloomington that has served gelato for a few years now. The cafe started with the name "Colpa Dolce," but the ownership change renamed it Neannie's cafe. It is located, not so far from IU Press, on Sixth and Madison.\nTei Laine\nGraduate Student
Priviledge transcends tradition\nMatt Curtis (IDS, Jordan River Forum, Jan. 13) asserts that "traditional family values" must be preserved. What "traditional" values? Should we have preserved the tradition that did not consider African-Americans to be real people and thus denied them marriage rights entirely before the Civil War? Or better to have kept the long and proud tradition that considered women as little more than property, passed from father to husband in the sacred rite of marriage? Women could not vote, hold property or enter into contracts well into the 20th century in this country and are still treated this way in parts of the world. \nWhat entitles the "traditional" value of mixed-sex marriages to preservation? What value does such a tradition have beyond the mere fact that it is, indeed, traditional? Why should an abusive father and a neglectful mother automatically qualify for government privilege and protection merely because they differ in chromosome composition by a single X or Y, when two individuals who were not born with this difference must fight every step of the way to have their relationship recognized and respected? Some 1,400 privileges, rights and benefits accrue automatically to individuals who marry. Gay people seek nothing but to be recognized as full citizens of this country, accorded the same rights enjoyed by everyone else. The simple fact is there is no compelling reason for the government to continue to endorse discrimination against a significant portion of the populace. \nAndy Schroeder\nSenior
Questioning 'values'
Matt Curtis wrote an alarming letter on Jan. 13 that advocated a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. I even had difficulty deciding where to begin regarding his letter. \nFirst, I have to ask what information these opinions are founded on because there is no data available, to my knowledge, that can support or oust the claim that traditional family values and traditional families make communities, and much less the country, a stronger and safer place. If there is no same-sex marriage, then how can there be a conclusion that states' same-sex marriage is detrimental to traditional family values, let alone the nation?\nNext, a push for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional because the state would be endorsing religion, and the government has no place in private matters such as these. This can easily be supported by Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas. Also, the civil rights (and notice I did not put quotes around it, Matt) of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered persons is a civil rights issue that affects everyone. What stops the government from banning heterosexual marriage? If the government can legally discriminate against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered persons, then what prevents discrimination against any other group? We are all at risk and shoving this issue of civil rights aside and disregarding it as such is a blatant pretermission of everyone's civil rights. Furthermore, it negates the great work of civil leaders past, present and future.\nFinally, I would like to question the actual definition of traditional family values and a traditional family. In an era where prenuptial agreements are substituted for wedding vows and the phrase "until death do us part" becomes ever more arbitrary, I have to question the "values" (Matt, notice I did put quotations here) of the so-called traditional family. Even if you argue that the term traditional reaches further back in time, I am positive that you will find no stronger correlation between a strong, moral nation and a traditional family, than a non-traditional family. Unless, you have some skewed view or interpretation of McCarthy, immigration in the 19th century, and/or the events surrounding the Civil Rights Act of the 1960s.\nAmanda Peterson\nSenior
Grammar for dummies
In response to: "Residence hall graffiti dominates harassment complaints ..." (IDS, Jan. 13)\nDoesn't it just figure? Whoever wrote "Nazi's rule" on a dry-erase board in a residence hall was so ignorant he didn't even know how to form the plural of the word "Nazi." (I'm guessing it was a male.) What he wrote was the singular possessive, making "rule" a noun instead of a verb. He had a subject with no predicate. "Nazi's rule" is the same grammatically as "child's toy" or "athlete's uniform." I hope the writer scheduled a course in remedial English.\nBob Eakle\nIU Staff
Education Economics\nI hope the IDS editorial staff lacked appropriate research rather than refused to care to develop a competent position with regard to its Jan. 13 editorial. The staff included several incorrect assumptions that severely misdirect opinion. \nFirst, they describe the national economy as rebounding. Untrue. The perceived recovery comes as a result of economic ratios that show all reward going to the billionaire capital owning class. Moreover, unemployment has fallen over the last quarter, but not because people found jobs, but because 300,000 workers gave up hope looking for one. Unemployment remains at the highest levels in decades; it is a real epidemic. And, what justification exists for just assuming the theory of trickle down economics? It may be a pretty theory if I own a billion dollar company, but not only does it not prove workable in the real world, it isn't even desirable to anyone else.\nThe editorial staff again erred by casting former Gov. O'Bannon as quick to trim the education budget and the IU Trustees as responsible for raising tuition by more than a third over two years. Neither claim approaches reality. Anyone familiar with Indiana government -- even his critics -- knew O'Bannon worked relentlessly on behalf of education, earning the informal title "The Education Governor." And, when the federal government refused to provide adequate assistance and reductions were made, the Trustees acted with anything in mind but students' or Indiana's best interests by raising tuition 35 percent. The extra money went to vaguely designed initiatives in only a few departments like music and Eastern studies. As a result, thousands of Hoosiers who subsidize the University annually cannot afford to send their children to college, because they don't have the extra $3,000 annually. It's a shame; I guess the extra money hasn't managed to trickle down yet. \nThe IDS editorial board did draw one accurate conclusion. Education is vital to Indiana's progress. Considering that, I don't know how safe that education budget would be moving from a governor nicknamed "Education" to one called "Slash," Mitch Daniels.\nGrant McFann\nSenior
