Sean May and IU men's basketball\nThe present state of Indiana basketball can be summed up in two words: Sean May.\nCharles Lichtman\nAlumnus
Handling a new start\nI'm writing in response to the alumnus who criticized Indiana's current administration for keeping Mike Davis as basketball coach. In his response, he claims IU's current administration is to blame for Bob Knight's firing, Mike Davis' hiring and Indiana's inability to go after Rick Pitino. All of these are false. The administration that fired Bob Knight was headed by Myles Brand as president, and Clarence Donninger as athletics director, and had nothing to do with the current administration. \nWe now have a president in Adam Herbert who has done good things for Indiana since coming to IU, and an athletics director in Rick Greenspan, who hired a top-notch football coach just months into his position. I am neither an advocate nor am I pleased with IU's current status in basketball; I just wanted to mention that these claims were false. Indiana's athletics department is in good hands with Greenspan, and we have a chance to be a top-10 basketball team next season, not to mention a bowl-eligible football team. I can handle that. \nMike Johnston\nJunior
Let's show 'em what IU basketball is about
\nThe 29-year Knight era was quite a ride. We should always be appreciative of what he did for the IU-Bloomington community. Stories of his discreet benevolence are many. More than once, I wrote letters to the Herald Times supporting him when he was under fire -- which was often. Even his international notoriety was entertaining. We were in Hungary in the early '90s. In a Budapest train station, splashed across the front page of a newspaper was a picture of the Knight-Cheaney mock "bullwhipping." When Knight was fired, I was sad. What were we going to do during those dreary Indiana winters?\nBut Knight's dark side eventually pops up. He is a vengeful man. His cruel, demeaning put-down of Mike Davis, when Davis was already down, was unconscionable. Mike Davis had previously earned praise and was Knight's loyal witness concerning the incident that triggered Knight's dismissal. If Knight wanted to fire somebody, he should have benched his son for his very mediocre play all those years. \nLet's show 'em, Mike, that Indiana basketball winters are not so dull after all. Let's show 'em that IU is bigger than ever in the shadow of Bob Knight.\nJerry Gregory\nAlumnus
Parking needed for renovated library\nHas anybody else noticed what's missing from the architect's drawing of planned expansion for the Main Library? Parking.\nBetty Rose Nagle\nAssociate professor
Parents, not teachers, at fault in education
Regarding "Merit v. Tenure" (April 7) by Edward Delp: With his latest column, Mr. Delp has officially proven that he is more naive than my 4-year-old cousin. After his fantasy-world claim in a previous column that a mere 2,000 acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would be affected by oil drilling (when the real figure is 1.9 million acres), he now advocates for the quintessential black-and-white conservative solution for education: merit pay. \nHave you taken a minute to think about what's really going on in our schools? The idea behind merit pay is that everything about student success rests with one group of people alone: teachers. In reality, teachers only play a partial role in educational success. The real problem in education today is a lack of student motivation, which is caused by little or no parental involvement. \nI recently saw this firsthand while visiting a middle school in Indianapolis. Teachers regularly had to deal with fights in the halls, I saw a 13-year-old boy being arrested for drug violations, and my host teacher told me that when students didn't want to do their homework, they would simply take their assignment sheets, crumple them and throw them on the floor. For me to have even thought about doing such things when I was that age would have been impossible. Ever since I was young, my parents had constantly instilled a drive for learning in me. If I had ever thrown away my homework, I knew that there would be severe consequences when my dad found out. \nEven if you offer a patient the most expensive and effective drug in the world, it will do no good if he spits back in your face. Likewise, a teacher working "on merit" (which is probably a reference by Mr. Delp to the black-and-white solution of standardized tests) may be highly motivated, but that will do nothing if students put out no effort. The real solution to education lies not with the Governator's shoot-first ask-later solutions, but with motivating the group that can make the real difference: parents.\nJustin E. Peckner\nSenior
Civility not a partisan issue
I was utterly disgraced by the lack of respect shown to Mr. David Horowitz at Thursday's presentation on the Academic Bill of Rights. Not only were the radical liberals rude, unprofessional and disruptive, but they were a disgrace to the entire campus. A University-sponsored academic lecture -- yes, even one given by a conservative -- deserves to be heard. The bill written by Mr. Horowitz would foster "an environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas." Civility has never been a partisan issue. It is an inherent right of every human being to be treated with respect. The University should not tolerate hypocritical, ill-informed and discourteous individuals to humiliate our community the way we were last evening. We must all work to uphold the integrity of our campus by respectfully accepting not only diversity of race but also of thought. As David Horowitz civilly stated, "Without diversity, there is no academic freedom."\nLindsay Kerrigan\nSophomore
Horowitz's ideas want free academic atmosphere
\nThe article featuring the David Horowitz speech displayed a picture of a protester holding a sign which read: "Horowitz Stifles Free Speech" I find the latter statement to be fundamentally wrong, since, although I did not attend the speech and although I know little about the basis behind many of his neoconservative ideas, I do recognize him from the work he has done with a First Amendment group called FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education). This group is mostly involved in speaking out against university-adopted "speech codes" believed by Horowitz and other FIRE proponents to have been wrongfully used since the '80s to punish students for politically incorrect speech. These speech codes according to FIRE activists come in the form of harassment guidelines found in schools' harassment policies. FIRE's stance is that students with opinions found to be controversial or deviant from the status quo have become subject to university sanctions and other penalties stemming from unjust harassment violations. My perplexity is this: If Horowitz is a suppressor of free speech according to protestors, and if professors some day are barred from expressing their opinions openly, why should students have to endure the same penalties? By stopping what he sees as professors offering one-sided or limited perspectives and relinquishing the control faculty has on suppressing the speech of students, he is only taking back the power to where it belongs: in the hands of the tuition-paying masses. It ought to be noted that he doesn't wish to stifle speech, but to see his vision of both ideas coexisting in an academic atmosphere that honors the freedom of expression. \nEthan Simcox\nFreshman
Horowitz's speech was irrational, hateful
\nThis letter is in response to the IDS article about Horowitz's speech (April 7). Horowitz was at IU to promote his Academic Bill of Rights, but is this what he actually did? No, Horowitz simply gave the audience a succession of insults against homosexuals, women, Africans, Muslims, liberals and leftists. With regards to his comments about the situation in Iraq, Against the Operation in Iraq would like to point out his lies. The "historically oppressed Iraqis," as Horowitz calls them, can thank the Republicans (and the Democrats) for the death of more than 100,000 innocents. \nHorowitz definitely likes bogus statistics. Fifty-eight percent (not 70 percent) of Iraqis voted last January. Horowitz said "they voted against terror." He could not be more accurate. The Iraqis did vote against the terror of U.S. occupation by voting against the U.S.-backed candidate (Alawi). By voting for the Shiite Alliance, the Iraqis expressed their desire to see the end of the U.S. unlawful occupation. Horowitz said that if anti-war movements succeeded, innocent Iraqis (and Americans) would be "slaughtered." We would like to point out that innocents have continuously been "slaughtered" as a result of the occupation. As for Horowitz's repeated calls to denunciation, we at AOI would like to point out how strange and distorted his conceptions of democracy and diversity are. What is the next step after denunciation? \nWe hope that the people who attended his speech realized the nature of Horowitz's discourse. It was a discourse of irrationality and hatred. He tried to scare people and instill in them the fear of the other. Horowitz always tries to appeal to the most abject confines in humans where racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia and intolerance swarm. \nFrancois Mulot\nGraduate student and co-founder of Against the Occupation of Iraq
Sex offender not representative of Boy Scouts of America\nAmy Obermeyer's article "If you can't trust a boy scout..." (April 6) conveniently leaves out or misinterprets facts that don't support her already biased viewpoint on the Boy Scouts of America. I think it is clear throughout the article that she has already made up her mind about the Boy Scouts and their commitment to family values even before this incident came to light.\nThe actions of Douglas S. Smith Jr. are cause for outrage. However, to imply the Boy Scouts of America is directly or indirectly involved in the business of supporting child pornography is disgraceful and downright contemptible. Smith had no criminal history prior to this act and furthermore his office, including his work computer, showed no traces that he was committing these disgusting crimes. I ask you then how the Boy Scouts of America can be held responsible for the private actions of one man in their organization? Maybe they should follow all their employees around to make sure they are not committing crimes?\nShields said in a Fox interview, "We're rededicating our efforts to provide a safe environment for our children." If this is not, as Ms. Obermeyer states, "a reaffirmation of their commitment to children," then I don't know what she is expecting. The fact of the matter is the Boy Scouts did everything in their power and knowledge at the time to protect the children in their organization, shown in the fact that none of the photos on his computer were connected to the BSA or any children in the Boy Scouts. This man has committed morally heinous acts against children and our anger is definitely called for and for the victims of the other 5300 predators caught by Operation Predator, which includes doctors, police officers, teachers, camp counselors and coaches. So I guess my question to Ms. Obermeyer is, why don't you write articles on them? Or maybe title your article, "If you can't trust a doctor, teacher, camp counselor or coach…"\nErik Bace\nSophomore
Logging in the Hoosier National Forest needed
I am writing to offer my applause for the Indiana Forest Alliance and the regional organization Heartwood for their interest in the management of Hoosier National Forest. However, it is the belief of myself and many others that logging is in fact, a necessity for the proper management of the forest. \nIt can be seen by examining the history of this region that oak establishment has declined while establishment of shade-tolerant species has continued successfully over the past 80-100 years. This is due to lack of disturbance. Forest fires were once nature's way of disturbance -- where a forest was swept by fire, regenerative growth began. It has been seen that fires once routinely swept this area (mean fire interval was once every two to eight years). However, with the placement of modern fire breaks such as roads and fire lines, this mean fire interval is now more than 80 years. Birds and mammals in this region use oak more than any other hardwood species. \nSuccessional growth forests are far more necessary for many native species than are old-growth forests. This is particularly evident by examining existing populations of ruffed grouse, woodcock and cerulean warblers. While these birds were once common in the state of Indiana, particularly here in the heavily wooded area of Hoosier National Forest, their numbers are now nearly depleted, and this depletion has been directly correlated to lack of successional growth forests. \nSometimes a sound management plan is the most emotionally taxing plan, and such is the case here. While it is pleasant to feel like we are saving our forests by taking action against logging, in fact, we are only homogenizing our hardwood species and decreasing animal diversity by depleting necessary environments. Over the next few months, the USFWS and IDNR will be presenting several management plans for Hoosier National Forest to the public. It is in the best interest of the forest that a well-defined logging plan be decided. Little trees need hugs too.\nAlex Rang\nSenior
Evolution debate healthy for science, religious students
\nI enjoyed Adam Sedia's column "God created evolution" (April 1), though I was surprised to see it when it's such an important yet childish debate. An almost identical article appeared in the South High School Optimist last week. Although I am a conservative take-the-bible-literally type Christian, I agree with you on most points except that evolution is watertight. Virtually no theory is watertight; even Newtonian physics has been found to be false but still accurate in everyday life. \nAs bad as it is to teach children to accept creation without thought, so it is also dangerous to teach them to accept evolution "because it's right," which is about all they are told. I had high school 13 years ago in New York, a land where I can't imagine creation ever being shown anything but disgust. \nHowever, I would have welcomed some challenge to evolution which I found only later in my own reading in college was not anywhere near as watertight as student-sheep are being led to believe. Don't fool yourself into thinking that there isn't a hidden agenda on both sides (Christianity and science) -- which is to destroy the other. \nHowever, I am one of a growing number of Christians who feel that Christians belong in science as much as everyone else -- even more so. Some of my friends are creationist professors and Ph.D.s at IU in the department of biology, chemistry and cognitive science, and another just received his Ph.D. in geology but is an old-earth/evolutionist/creationist. Students taught the literal creation story and made to think that if they're a Christian that they can have no part of science is a travesty. \nScience is for all of us and much to the chagrin of many scientists it is for us to glorify God in our searching its secrets, such as evolution. When science has opposition it thrives; let's teach kids to think, that's far more important than exactly which theory they subscribe to.\nClint Mahoney\nBloomington Resident
