STRAIGHT threatens sense of safety for gays

As a lesbian, I find it difficult to believe members of STRAIGHT who say their purpose is to "provide students with an official and formal organization in which they can express their view regarding their refusal to accept or support homosexuality."

What form would this "refusal" take? Even more disturbing, STRAIGHT members reportedly don't hate homosexuals, just homosexuality. How are these two hatreds different? To those who are the targets of such hatred, it feels the same.

Here is a case in point: Not long ago I drove to the corner of College and Allen Avenues and picked up my life partner from work. We chatted about our day as I drove us to the intersection of College and Atherton. We stopped for the red light and exchanged a "hello, nice to see you" kiss while we waited. We were oblivious to the passengers in the cars around us until we heard what sounded like horseplay.

We didn't pay much attention to these sounds until the light turned green and we crossed Atherton. As we did, a car with three men passed us on the left. One of the men was leaning out the window and flipping us off. As he yelled his face was pink with rage. I reacted by slowing down so as not to get in front of their car and risk being followed home.

I wondered how so much hatred could be generated from such a loving act. I am still baffled. Did that man hate homosexuality or did he hate us? It was impossible for us to make that distinction.

This kind of hatred directed against me and my partner is the kind of hatred that can be fostered in groups like STRAIGHT. By condemning homosexuality, one condemns the homosexual.

I am curious: why do the people interested in forming STRAIGHT feel it necessary to "reinforce adherence in general heterosexual tradition?" And besides, how can my love for a woman threaten another's love for a member of the opposite sex?

I am a member of the Penn State Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Support Network. The primary goal of the network is to "provide a more hospitable environment for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons by establishing an identifiable network of persons who can provide support, information, and a safe haven to lesbian, gay and bisexual persons within the University."

STRAIGHT threatens the above. Students are already feeling unsafe and threatened because of STRAIGHT. I urge members of the Penn State community, especially my heterosexual allies, to send a message that hatred of homosexuality is not welcomed. Write your letters of love and support to the editor today. We need to hear from you now.

Kimberlie Kranich
member Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Support Network

Supreme court ruling only appropriate choice

The Undergraduate Student Government supreme court is to be congratulated for its denial of a charter to STRAIGHT (Students Reinforcing Adherence to Heterosexual Tradition). The students' action shows the court recognizes and opposes bigotry when it sees it.

The mission statement of STRAIGHT says, in part, that it seeks be a vehicle to express "views regarding (students') refusal to accept or support homosexuality."

While everyone is entitled to their views, providing a chartered organization for such a group would legitimatize its prejudicial intent. Groups such as STRAIGHT can only foster hate and intolerance where knowledge and enlightenment are needed.

The National Education Association understands this need well, which is why it has put resolutions in place over the years guaranteeing the students and staff of our schools safe environments in which to learn and work.

It is not just a good action to take, it is the only action to take. The students on the supreme court showed they understand this concept well.

Jim Testerman
Co-chair, National Education Association Gay and Lesbian Caucus

Apologizing for slavery will not undo damage

I'm writing in regard to the article, "Pa. may say sorry for slavery" (Collegian, Feb. 20). I think this issue is one of irrelevance.

First of all, state Rep. John Myers, D-Phila., wants to spend taxpayer's money on trying to find out "who is guilty." Gee, let me think . . . the slave owners, that's who. Anybody in connection with this is already dead and their descendants aren't responsible for their actions. Why are we going to waste money on this when we could spend it on other things, such as better highways?

Secondly, demanding reparations to the descendants of slaves is ludicrous. What was done, is done. Move on and start worrying about something that pertains to today's issues. True, people were enslaved, but when it comes to mistreatment of people by our government, take a number and stand in line. If we have to pay reparations to the descendants of slaves, we better start paying the Native Americans, Chinese and Japanese, too. By the time we're done we'll have no money or land.

Finally, what's up with the apology? Is saying, "I'm sorry," going to change anything? I think not. Saying you're sorry doesn't do a thing to anybody. Like anyone's going to say, "This country sucks. They enslaved my people. What? They're sorry? OK, that makes me feel better. Now I can start loving America again."

In conclusion, money shouldn't be spent on this. Sorry, but my tax money better go to something that we ALL care about and can use. Do I condone something that happened long ago? No. So should I have to be the one to pay? No.

Alex de Jesus
sophomore-kinesiology