Dear Editor:
I am appalled. I cannot believe that anyone in this day and age, especially a student at this politically active university, would purposefully set out not to vote.ÿYes, voting is not mandatory.ÿYes, you may not like everything about one candidate or the other.ÿYes, they may do things you don't always agree with.ÿBut not voting is denying yourself your rights.ÿRights that were not always automatic in this country and are certainly not automatic in other countries across the globe.ÿAmerican citizens spent decades fighting for the right for everyone to vote.ÿTwo constitutional amendments were made to give all adults this right, not just land-owning white males.ÿBlack citizens used to be turned away from the polls by pollsters wielding shotguns.ÿToday, the only thing that is stopping you from voting is yourself.
Someone will be elected, whether or not you vote.ÿNot voting doesn't mean we're not going to elect a president.ÿI also have a preference between John Kerry and George W. Bush, and I also will be sad if the man I voted for is not elected.ÿBut I have done my part.ÿI have campaigned on his behalf, and encouraged others to vote, as well.
However, if you abstain from this election, you have no right to be upset with the results. I just cannot believe that someone does not recognize the harm that he is doing himself by denying himself this right, and I also cannot believe that he is encouraging others to do the same. It doesn't make sense to me at all.ÿTo say that there are other ways to be involved, besides working on campaigns, i.e. trying to affect policy, is true. But someone first has to elect those policymakers, and it obviously isn't going to be people who purposefully choose to not to vote.ÿ
Leah Fulner Sophomore, SPA
Dear Editor:
While I am a man of faith, I'm definitely not one to preach. But I think that those who make their decisions with much religious thought should consider this:
Clergy in the Catholic Church have, in the past year, said that Catholics should not vote for Sen. John Kerry because he is pro-choice when it comes to abortion. They say that abortion is wrong because it amounts to murder.
What about starting a war that has resulted in the deaths of thousands? The Bible states that King David sent Uriah, the husband of David's mistress Bathsheba, to the front lines of a war, committing him to certain death. As a result of his actions, King David was prevented by G-d from building the Temple in Jerusalem, because he had the blood of Uriah (and many other men) on his hands. It equated the relocation of Uriah to murder, because David knew that he would be killed.
George W. Bush has done the same thing: sending soldiers off to war with the knowledge that many of them will die. According to the teachings of the Bible, then, George Bush should not be given a task as important as president. He has violated the lessons of the Bible, and has indeed acted in quite an un-Christian manner.
Jason Silverman Sophomore, SPA
