OCR Text |
Show ™ SUMMER UTAH CHRONICLE 0•PINION www.dailyutahchronicle.com 5.:; Friday, June 17, 2005 I accept gay marriage, but what about the kids? Editor: I guess this letter might be a little untimely, or probably offbeat. But recently, when the Pride Parade photos were printed, I thought this would be a good time to send in this letter, which is more about the debate I have with myself. I am not against gay marriage—in fact, I am all for it. I truly respect homosexuals and believe that they have the right to be what they want, and be with whom they want to be. But there is one thing that kind of confuses me and puts me in a double mind about the issue: gay/ lesbian parenting. Though change is the only thing that remains constant, one thing that surely cannot change is the incapability of men to give birth. Everyone has the right to fight for his rights and to live the life he wants, but who is fighting for the kids? Is it that only the grown-ups can fight for their rights? What about the rights of humanity that still can't speak? Who will speak for them? My confusion with the gay/lesbian parenting revolves around the actual raising of the kid. Men and women are very different emotionally, and in my opinion the child has every right to experience all the emotions as he learns the truths of life. Some might argue that when homosexual relations occur, one of the two takes the role of the man and other of the woman, but yet a man is still a man and a woman is still a woman. Some might also argue that you can't judge same-sex parenting or say it's not going to work without giving it a try. I have a question: Can you see yourself having two daddies or two mommies? There are a lot more complications than just two people of the same sex staying together. If someone decides to live this lifestyle, fine by me, and I guess it should be fine by anyone because that's what the fight is about. But why do you want to put the child through a childhood he or she does not deserve? You cannot always be around when he or she is teased in school: "Oh, you are the one with two daddies." Though we can debate this endlessly, something that even change will take a long time to change is accepting that your parents are gays or lesbians. I guess that will be the toughest fight that waits in this debate for rights and duties. Ruchika Joshi Graduate Student, Mechanical Engineering Online Poll THE CHRONICLE'S VIEW More money doesn't solve nursing problem F inally, some relief is in sight for Utah's nursing shortage. After U Professor Carole Gassert wrote a grant, the U.S. Department of Labor decided to award the U's College of Nursing almost $900,000. ;.,4This generous amount of federal aid couldn't have come at a better time. U College of Nursing Dean Maureen Keefe estimates that Utah is currently 1,000 nurses short of the amount needed to provide decent health care for its population, which is representative of a rather tragic nationwide trend. What makes the situation painfully ironic is the fact that the shortage is not caused by a lack of student interest in the U's nursing program. On the contrary, the U has to turn away two out of every three applicants to the program, some of whom have displayed exemplary grades and have fulfilled all of the requirements to be admitted. Sadly, the college has had to deny the admittance of qualified applicants, despite the high demand for nurses, because of one reason: money. The college simply has lacked the funds necessary to employ and properly train nursing instructors. Until now. After it receives the grant money, the college potentially will be able to offer admission to 16-20 additional applicants in the bachelor's program and 12-14 additional applicants in the master's program each year because it will be able to hire more faculty members to teach and supervise them. While this is good news for the college, its future applicants and Utah residents alike, there are two clouds to this silver lining. First, while it is a hefty chunk of change, the grant will not completely remedy the shortage. It is definitely a starting point, but the fact remains that larger measures need to be taken to permanently resolve the shortage. This leads to the second cloud in the storm: Utah should be responsible for solving its own problems. What does it mean when the federal government can recognize such an obviously dire need and our own state Legislature can't? The nursing drought is not a new problem—it has been a crisis in the state for years. Consequently, U lobbyists have continually attempted—unsuccessfully—to shake some change out of the state's piggy bani to help alleviate the shortage burden. Let this be a lesson to other campus entities that are striking out with the Legislature: If atfirstyou don't succeed, go over their heads. However, it may be remiss to completely discount the Legislature just yet. Lobbyists for the Marriott Library renovation were finally victorious this spring after years of battle. Perhaps with that large appropriation already in the bank—and with the U's more amicable relationship with the U, thanks in part to President Young's efforts—state representatives will be more willing to dole out the cash to solve the nursing shortage problem. After all, it would irresponsible for legislators, who like all Utah residents will be or have been healthcare recipients, to continue to ignore the gravity of this situation. How can the U's health science institutions provide the highest quality of health care without enough nurses to care for their patients? Unsigned editorials reflect the majority opinion of The Summer Utah Chronicle Editorial Board. Editorial columns and letters to the editor arc strictly Hie opinions of the author. The forum created on the Opinion Page is one based on vigorous debate, while at the same time demanding tolerance and respect. Material defamatory to an individual or group because of race, ethnic background, religion, creed, gender, appearance or sexual orientation will be edited or will not be published. How many cans of pop 1 ' ' ] ^ shamefully healthy, and 1 mock everyone 41% 16 votes 23% 9 votes 2-3 4-5 1 7 votes • 2 votes 6+: I would tote around an IV bag of Diet Coke, if I could. 13% 5 votes To vote: www.dailyutahchronicle.com Celebrity news coverage rages out of control Emphasis on pop culture distracts from the real issues M ichael Jackson is a free man. Of course, you are probably aware of this because of the mass media machine's unnecessary play-by-play account of Jackson's every move. "Mr. Jackson will not take the stand today. Mr. Jackson just blew his nose. At this moment, Mr. Jackson is probably brushing his teeth with a Peter Pan toothbrush." The obsession with pop culture in this country is tragic. You can tune into news stations that once had journalistic integrity and hear about Arnold Schwarzenegger's car. When did the lives of celebrities become newsworthy? Every day, people wasted their time outside the courthouse in which Jackson was on trial. They waited, along with numerous members of the media, for a two-second peek at a black umbrella sheltering a pop star who has had so much plastic surgery his nose is falling off. At night you could tune into the E! channel for "The Michael Jackson Trial/' a show on which a bunch of no name actors re-enact highlights from inside the courtroom, after which a panel of lawyers debate the strategies of the prosecution and defense. Now that it is all over, there is probably one question on the minds of all the people who invested themselves in the Jackson trial: Now what? How about tuning into the real world? Not the one on MTV, but the one in which there are real people with real problems that people should care about. Call me crazy, but I think things like AIDS, starvation, poverty, our current war, foreign relations and government are a little more impor- Lindsey Sine tant than Britney Spears' pregnancy. Pop culture has caused us to overlook the things we should really care about. We live in a world where people think it is a good idea to build a multi-million dollar shopping complex and condominiums less than a block away from a homeless shelter. I guess there's nothing quite like valet-parking your car and splurging on a $150 pair of designer jeans from JMR while a homeless person We should care about diseases f-; sits outside the Road Home shelter, with no cures because someday f/ a mere 50 yards away, wearing the someone we love might die as a resame crappy shirt he or she has had sult, and we will want to have aided .'> on for eight weeks. the search for a cure. If people have learned one thing We should care about the govern- * from the media, it is how to idolment and vote, not because P. Diddyf ize and mimic a _ _ _ _ tells us to, but % person they don't because we know ••know for material it is important to .W hen did the reasons. I want to have a voice. * have clothes like We should care,%' his. I want hair like lives of celebrities about the things ; hers. I want a car become newsworthy? that negatively like his. I want a affect the people body like hers. ^ " ^ "~~" in this world and It is time for people to wake up. take an active position in finding a This country has bigger problems positive change. than Lindsay Lohan's plummeting We shouldn't care so much about weight. pop culture because, at the end of We should care about the homethe day, the outcome of Michael less and starving because, unlike the Jackson's trial doesn't change a aforementioned actress, they are not single thing. starving by choice. letters@chronicle.utah.edu (sudden, abrupt, dismal) S.A.D. Which one's the star? What's this? "Dancing with the Stars." Um, the girl. She was on an island. Or "Fear Factor." I know she ate a rat at one point. MikeHaring Was it a live rat? Not after she bit the head off. |