Letters to the Editor

Dropping the pledge is reasonable

James Pfrehm must not realize that there are religious denominations, Jehovah's Witnesses for example, whose members believe that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance violates their religious convictions. I don't think it's the flag itself that violates their religious convictions, but the pledging of one's allegiance to it. Perhaps this was the case in his fifth-grade class. Perhaps the teacher decided to drop the Pledge of Allegiance so two students in her class wouldn't be forced to choose between violating their religious convictions by reciting the pledge or refusing to recite it and being ridiculed by their classmates. To me, this seems like a pretty reasonable decision by the teacher, infirm though she might have been.

Emily Sisson

graduate admissions

Pfrehm uses "illogical logic"?

James Pfrehm's argument in support of a mandatory Pledge of Allegiance in public schools amounted to a played-out diatribe favored by most conservatives: "I'm in the majority, so I have the right to press my Christo-centric beliefs upon everyone in the minority!" Like most of his conservative brethren, James uses inappropriate comparisons and illogical "logic" to support his position. For example, Mr. Pfrehm makes the case that the Pledge of Allegiance should remain mandatory in schools since it is allowed at Major League Baseball games. Is Mr. Pfrehm aware that the public school system is government-funded while the MLB is a business? The government has to respect many rules and regulations that do not apply to businesses (i.e., separation of church and state).

Mr. Pfrehm then continues with an attack against the ACLU and those who protest a mandatory pledge by making them out to be whiners who run and cry to their mommies every time they are offended. This too is a tired stereotype favored by conservatives. Yes, I am offended by the pledge because of its not-so-subliminal reference to the god of Christianity. people who fight for their Constitutional rights are not whiners and babies, and the Second Amendment guarantees both my freedom of religion and my freedom from religion.

Dan Riley

junior, premajor

Some math for McCormick

On behalf of my Math 112 class, I would like to point out an error that President McCormick made in the most recent edition of University Week. He stated that the TAs were demanding a 12 percent increase over three years, and he deduced that the total percentage increase would be 36 percent. However, that is an incorrect calculation. The actual percentage increase for the three-year period would be 40.5 percent, not 36 percent. Since details are important, I thought I would bring this to the public attention.

David L. Coe

senior, premajor

Department transfer reqs rely on "psych"ic message

The psychology department changed transfer requirements and "didn't actively talk" to transfer institutions, but UW faculty "helped design the new guidelines." Why does that conjure up a picture of psychology professors sitting cross-legged in a room with a ouija board, planning curriculum? Now was that the department of psychology or parapsychology?

Michael McCadden

UW Educational Outreach