The Rice Thresher, Vol. 93, No. 11, Ed. 1 Friday, November 4, 2005 Page: 2 of 16
sixteen pages : ill. ; page 19 x 15 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THE RICE THRESHER OPINION FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4,2005
the Rice Thresher
Runners: Stop or clean
Baker 13 butt-prints
We are ashamed whenever we see custodial staff cleaning
shaving cream off of windows after Baker 13 — particularly
after Halloween, when the mess is most widespread. Running
around campus wearing nothing but shaving cream is generally
an innocuous activity — a little shaving cream in the grass will
evaporate — but it becomes disrespectful when it escalates to
dirtying windows and creating unpleasant work for the staff.
Custodians have enough to do around campus without wiping
students' butt-prints.
It's OK for students to make asses out of themselves — we ap-
preciate the stress relief Baker 13 provides. We just think the event
could be more respectful, and still just as fun, if the runners either
stopped rubbing themselves against windows or woke up at the butt-
crack of dawn on the morning after each run to clean up. If individual
runners cannot be trusted to wash off their own butt-prints, the job
should be Club 13's, not the staffs.
More generally, many of the best moments at Rice—such as Willy
Week jacks and large parties—involve messes which are left for the
staff to pick up. Not only is this unfair to the people who work around
the clock to make the campus beautiful, but it also jeopardizes the
existence of these traditions because they become a burden to the
non-students at the university.
A little personal responsibility from students will not ruin Baker
13 and other Rice traditions; it will just increase the likelihood that
these traditions will be around for years to come.
Maintain visionary
Smalley's legacy
Nine years after Richard Smalley won his Nobel Prize, it may
be difficult for students to appreciate the extent to which Smalley
put Rice on the map. (See story, page 1.) His brilliant mind and
tireless dedication to problems of both a nano and global scale
elevated Rice to a more international stature, and the university
will continue to benefit from his work. We think Rice owes it to
Smalley to honor his great career and life by continuing his legacy
in a few ways.
First, a Rice building should be named after Smalley. He de-
serves to be one of the few names that will always be spoken on
campus. We would most like to see the research tower to be built
at University Boulevard and Main Street named for him. Since the
tower will be another major step forward for Rice as a leader in sci-
ence and as a university in general, we think it is only appropriate
to name it after Smalley. If doing so is impossible for financial or
other reasons, it would also be fitting to name the Space Science
Building after him — the third floor housed his office and still
houses the Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology, and
it is unofficially known as "Smalley-World" already.
More abstractly, we hope Rice will preserve Smalley's legacy
by keeping two of his strongest research interests—nanotechnol-
ogy and the intersection of science and public policy — moving
forward. Rice should make a conscious and well-funded effort to
stay a vanguard school in nanotechnology for decades, and the
Baker Institute should continue to emphasize the importance of
including science and scientists in public policy research and
vice versa.
By taking these steps, we can ensure Smalley's unequivocally
positive impact on the university will continue.
Time running out for
C2C comments
The open comments period of President David Leebron's Call
to Conversation ends Nov. 15. Students and others who have not
already done so should go to http://www.rice.edu/c2c and give their
views on the desirability of increasing undergraduate enrollment
and many other topics.
Life has gotten hectic at Rice, so we are sure commenting has
slipped the minds of some students. We hope these students don't
miss the deadline, because everyone with something to say should
be a part of this dialogue.
Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the Thresher
editorial staff.
i
ip
I
MM'
J|l^
Please welcome the new cheeks contributing to a cleaner Baker 13.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Thresher leaves out
Envision contributors
To the editor:
Last week's Thresher ran an
article on my winning an Envision
Grant for a bio-diesel project ("Four
Envision grants awarded," Oct. 28).
The article neglected to mention
the other students involved, Lizzi
Clark, a senior at Hanszen College,
and Matt Yarrison, a graduate stu-
dent in chemical engineering, have
done as much or more work than I
have done. Also, there are several
other graduate and undergraduate
students who are working hard to
make this plan a reality.
Guyton Durnin
Will Rice senior
Anti-Hatfield ad
should not be printed
To the editor:
I am writing to express my
disapproval of the Thresher
running an ad for the Web site
http://www.firekenhatfield.com. Run-
ning such an ad seems to me to be an
implicit assent to the message being
voiced by the author of that site, and
I believe it is unconscionable for the
Thresher to allow a member of the
Rice community to be targeted in
such a malicious manner.
As good-natured as the au-
thor claims to be, his Web site
takes a very disrespectful tone
toward football Head Coach Ken
Hatfield — a man who, at the very
least, deserves more consideration
than is shown by the Thresher in
printing the aforementioned adver-
tisement. Putting the phrase "paid
advertisement" above a box proclaim-
ing, essentially, "Fire Ken Hatfield"
does not exempt the Thresher from
treating a fellow Owl with the same
respect it would extend to all others.
The Thresher claims the right to re-
fuse advertising at its discretion; in
the future, hopefully the editors will
live up to that claim.
Luke Stadel
Brown senior
Students show smarts
in opposing Prop. 2
To the editor:
I've always held a little enmity for
the "I go to Rice, I must be smart"
bumper sticker. But now I'm start-
ing to get it.
I've been consistently amazed
the past few weeks by the strong,
widespread opposition to Proposi-
tion 2 — a proposed constitutional
amendment to ban same-sex mar-
riage, civil unions and potentially all
marriages in the state of Texas.
The Texas legislature has as-
sumed Texas voters are here for their
pleasure. They assume we're so easily
enraptured by divisive amendments
like Proposition 2 that all they have to
do is put it on the ballot and we'll duti-
fully march off to Walgreen's to buy
some ink for our rubber stamps.
Governor Rick Perry thinks we
don't get it Rice students get it They
don't like discrimination in our state
constitution.
As a recent opinion article
showed, they don't want govern-
ment in their religion or religion
in their government ("Catholics
must oppose secular Amendment
2," Oct. 21). They don't like ballot
language so vague it would make
Samuel Beckett's head spin. But
most importantly, they don't like
politicians who will screw over their
friends just to clinch re-election.
That's why so many Rice students
have registered to vote, pledged
to vote against Proposition 2 and
volunteered their time and energy
helping to defeat it.
Voter turnout will barely top 10
percent in the upcoming election.
It's a sad state of affairs when such
a small minority decides the laws of
the state. But it's also an opportunity
for students to send a signal to the
entire world that our generation
understands equality under the law
better than any other generation in
American history. My peers go to
Rice and will vote against Proposition
2. What's smarter than that?
Ryan Goodland
Lovett junior
No Nonsense in November
coordinator
Columns' controversy
furthers conversation
To the editor:
Recently Laura Shepard wrote a
scathing reply ("Faulty faith columns
should not be printed," Oct. 28) to
Daniel Wang's guest column ("God's
love, forgiveness provide absolute
truth," Oct. 21) — a response that
is only half-deserved.
Part of her shock was due to
the fact that Rice's secular newspa-
per dared to print such extremist
religious views. I simply wanted
to clarify that his article stood in
comparison to the previous week's
column concerning the materialistic,
"feel-good" Christianity sold by Lake-
wood Church ("Lakewood: All the
fire without the brimstone," Oct. 7).
Wang attempted to provide his view
that Christianity should not make a
person feel warm and fuzzy inside
but instead create a person who is
penitent and convicted, though not
without hope.
Following that form, last week
David Axel insightfully provided his
own view, and so the conversation
continues ("Evangelical enigma
stumps subjective student," Oct.
28). Thus I find no fault with, and
in fact applaud, the newspaper for
facilitating a religious discussion,
allowing differing voices to assert
their views in an effort to better
understand each other.
As for Shepard's letter, I am con-
fused by her statement that "people
are entitled to believe what they like,
but to claim their own religious view
as infallible... is completely uncalled
for." Under these terms, people would
only be allowed to believe in what they
didn't really believe in, and to actually
believe in what one says one believes
in would be disrespectful. I can under-
stand the repulsion toward absolute
statements, especially when faith is
involved, but isn't it also an absolute
to say there are no absolutes?
Lie Liew
Will Rice senior
Bible is not a source
of "absolute truth"
To the editor:
Nothing Daniel Wang wrote
made me uncomfortable. What did
was knowing there was someone
who held his beliefs.
I do not believe basing your
opinions on the Bible will run you
the "risk of being labeled out of
touch." You might be labeled as an
ignorant person since the Bible is
very old, and since its applicability
has waned since it was written.
I do believe a person can de-
termine whether an action is right
or wrong. It is possible; it only re-
quires one to separate what is mor-
ally wrong from what is culturally
prohibited and acknowledge that
there is a fundamental difference
between the two.
I do believe that personal mean-
ing has been substituted for truth,
and I'm glad it has. Once the valid-
ity of truth is questioned, more
answers will appear. My own little
world inside my head is the only
thing of which 1 can be sure.
I do not believe in God. 1 do
not deny the existence of some
source, but 1 believe humankind is
completely alone in this world with
no hope for eternal salvation.
I do not believe there is an ab-
solute truth that is available to us
at $19.95 plus tax. 1 am irritated at
Wang's reliance on the Bible as a
source of "absolute truth."The Bible
is just a book — a cleverly written
one but a book nonetheless.
In my world, with no God, no
book to follow, no hope, no truth
to seek, where do I turn? Into
whom can I put my faith? What if
I were to take God's place? What
would happen if I were the one to
judge, forgive and love the sins of
humans? Does it matter that this
love is founded upon my absolute
certainty of humanity's loneliness
in the world?
If it did not matter, what else
would rely not on the path but on
the result?
Nick Martinez
Martel sophomore
CONTACTING THE
THRESHER
Letters
■ Letters to the editor should
be sent to the Thresher by e-mail
to thresher@rice.edu. Letters
must be received by 5 p.m. on
the Monday prior to a Friday
publication date.
■ All letters to the editor
must be signed and include
college and year if the writer
is a Rice student
■ Letters should be no lon-
ger than 250 words in length.
The Thresher reserves the
right to edit letters for both
content and length.
Subscribing
m Annual subscriptions are
available for $50 domestic and
$125 international via first
class mail.
Advertising
■ We accept display and
classified advertisements. Ad-
vertisements must be received
by 5 p.m. on the Monday prior
to a Friday publication date.
Please contact our advertising
manager at (713)348-3967 or
thresher-ads@rice. edu for more
information.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Obermeyer, Amber. The Rice Thresher, Vol. 93, No. 11, Ed. 1 Friday, November 4, 2005, newspaper, November 4, 2005; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth443204/m1/2/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.