Roberts Forum

I couldn't help but be slightly amused by the letter lamenting the small turnout for Chief Justice Roberts' address. In my years at BYU I observed that it took no less than a member of the First Presidency to fill the Marriott Center to capacity for Tuesday Devotionals. Even one of the Twelve could only draw a three-quarter crowd. Any other General Authority would be lucky to get a half-filled house, and professors and guests and so forth could usually only hope for a few sections. While any speaker at the Devotionals/forums is worth physical attendance, you can't fault busy students for prioritizing their time according to that which they feel will be of most benefit to them.

Ian Brown
Kingwood, Texas

Complex Dumbledore

This is in response to Christopher Lee's opinion piece on Friday about Dumbledore. To all of you out there who feel that Rowling ruined the Harry Potter books, or as Lee implies, ruined reading for you, is all that drama really necessary? All that Rowling did was to take a beloved character and make him more complicated. All the great characters in literature are complex -- that's what makes them interesting.

You don't have to agree with Rowling's views on the morality of homosexuality [and, disclaimer here: I don't] because no one is taking away your free agency. However, you should be able to accept that a person can be wise, kind, generous, and good, like Dumbledore, and also be gay.

You don't have to hate gays to be a bigot; all you have to do is doubt their capacity to make moral choices. And when you lump them into the same category as pedophiles and heroin addicts, you are definitely doing that. If this topic is uncomfortable for you to think about, don't just take the lazy way out and grumble about how rude it is for Rowling to remind you that gay people exist. Because in all honesty, the real reason you're angry at Rowling isn't for "messing with" the story after the books have been published, is it? How many of you will clamor to buy the Harry Potter encyclopedia (detailing all the minutiae of each character's life and then some) as soon as it comes out? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Jaime Alley
Richmond, Va.

Rowling not brave

I find it very telling that J.K. Rowling "had the confidence to bring...up" Dumbledore's sexual orientation after all was (or should have been) said and done. If she really wanted to show how sympathetic she is to the gay and lesbian plight, she would've written him out in the books.

But wait, then all the bigoted, family-oriented moms and dads wouldn't have spent all that glorious money on books, movie tickets and tie-in merchandise. How brave she is.

Fauneil Purcell
Provo

Offensive viewpoint

Despite Christopher Lee's claims he is not a bigot, I still found his Oct. 26 article (Leave It Alone: Dumbledore's Confession) highly offensive and inappropriate. It's not the fact that he has problems with Dumbledore being gay; everyone is entitled to their opinion. Rather, it was his unfair statement that if homosexuals are celebrated in the media, then naturally "pedophiles and heroin addicts" will be revered in the media next. This comparison is disrespectful and disregards the basic rights that should be extended to every human being, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Homosexuals already endure intense discrimination and The Daily Universe has absolutely no right adding to the hatred that exists by allowing articles like Christopher Lee's to be published.

Alexandra Bohn
Provo

Land of chubs

Having mandatory meal cards as a freshman at BYU is a joke. We freshman are pretty much being handed tickets to the land of the chubs. If we were sent to buy our own food, junk food would be reduced, and the students could be healthier. This isn’t only about gaining a few pounds to make us not look like the super model we’ve always dreamed of looking like though; this is about a lot more than just a few pounds.

Obesity is a serious health issue that is growing rapidly. Many may enjoy the easy access of the card and plead to not rid of them. It needs to be understood though that these are the kids that visit the vending machines so much that it can say their name back to them.

Let’s not allow these few to hold this a mandatory issue. I can see some concluding then that if we don’t want to eat like that then just don’t buy like that, but that is where we run into the system being unfair. You see if the money is not used then it maxes out and we lose our money.

It is well known that freshman want to live in the on-campus housing and will do what’s necessary to live there. The monopoly these people are pulling on us is sadly working but I am determined to stand and follow me and make a change.

Rachael Martin
Alpine

Voucher math

Voucher supporters like to trumpet the idea that they're somehow helping all kids in the state. When confronted with the fact that the average tuition of private schools is $4,519.97 and that the highest possible voucher is $3000--leaving $1,519.97 that many low-income families could never pay--the voucher supporters then claim that these low income families will benefit from smaller class sizes and increased funding. It's technically true, but look at the numbers.

There are currently only about 130 private schools in Utah, with a total enrollment somewhere in the neighborhood of 19,000 students. If, miraculously, those 130 schools could somehow double that enrollment, then 19,000 students--out of 500,000 in Utah--could make use of the vouchers. Now do the math: that'd equate to a class size decrease of 3.8%, or decreasing a class of 30 to 29. And if you spread out the money those private school students will leave in the public schools ($7,500, according to Parents for Choice In Education), that'd give public school kids an additional $285 a piece – a 3.9% increase. And that's the absolute best-case scenario.

So, the lucky few (19,000 if we're blindly optimistic) who can find and afford a place in private school get a "better" education (voucher supporters have repeatedly made the claim of private school superiority), while the vast majority (481,000, at least) have to be happy with 3.8% fewer kids in class and 3.9% more money. It's no wonder that vouchers supporters are in the minority in Utah.

Rob Wells
Provo

Gray no expert

When it comes to my opinion, I like to educate myself before coming to any conclusions. Whether it is Iraq, health care, social security, or global warming I try to get accurate information before forming an opinion. This is why when I read “Global warming fires” in the Reader’s Forum I thought I would try to provide some accurate information.

William Gray may be a meteorologist and expert on hurricane prediction, but he is far from the top expert on atmospheric conditions. On the topic of global warming he has yet to publish a peer reviewed article, probably because he lacks the physical evidence to support his theories.

A lot of the time it is our nature to search for evidence that supports our own point of view, but let’s not get tunnel vision. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently issued a report authored by 800 climate researchers in 130 countries and supported by 2500 scientists stating “evidence suggests a discernable amount of human influence on climate.” According to Newsweek, whom do we find tirelessly supporting anyone willing to publish anything denying global warming? Exxon-Mobil and the American Petroleum Institute. They have moved from positions stating that global warming wasn’t happening, to uncertainty in its validity, to uncertainty in whether humans were causing it, to even if humans are causing it, global warming isn’t a big deal.

I’m not an expert, but there is plenty of information out there. Use it.

Michael Witting
Puyallup, Wash.

Copyright Brigham Young University 29 Oct 2007