Greetings, my many scores of readers! I have more of my writing available for your reading pleasure. Here's a letter to the editor I wrote that got published in my college's student newspaper last year:
Dear Editor,
I am strongly opposed to the building and funding of the proposed Recreation, Health and Wellness Center. Here are a few reasons why I am opposed:
First, I think that a university education is already expensive enough. Adding more fees will discourage prospective students from attending NAU and current students from continuing their schooling at NAU.
Second, many students will not use the facilities no matter how fancy they are. If the project goes through, these students will be paying a lot of money for something that they will not benefit from.
Third, many students already have health insurance totally unaffiliated with NAU. Likewise, many students already belong to gyms off-campus. If the proposed complex is built, these students will be paying twice for the same services.
Fourth, there are many other avenues besides the NAU recreation center available to students who want to exercise. There are gyms, urban trails, parks, and fitness equipment for sale off campus. Counseling and medical care are also available in Flagstaff to those who are interested. These off-campus methods of staying healthy work well, and the local economy will actually be stimulated by NAU students utilizing local doctors’ offices, gyms, stores and other health-related businesses.
The final reason I have for opposing the proposed complex is more intangible than the others, but perhaps more important. I am opposed to the new complex because the funding and building of it do not fall under the category of what a university ought to be doing.
Let me explain. I do not think that a university’s job is to provide all the services that a college student could want. For example, while entertainment, excessive transportation options, non-academic conferences, and elaborate recreation/health/wellness centers are nice, they do not belong in the realm of what a university ought to be concerned with. A university’s main goal, in my opinion, should be the refining, disciplining and enlightenment of the mind. All other concerns are (or should be) subordinate to this goal.
But I don’t mean to get highfalutin. The purpose of this comment is to simply explain to you why I oppose the building of a new recreation/health/wellness center.
I am simply voicing my opinion as an NAU student concerned with the future of the institution of higher learning that I love.
Sincerely,
Telemoonfa
In the actual newspaper, my real name was published, but on this blog, I'm keeping my identity secret, remember?
It's time to do laundry. I hope you enjoyed that letter to the editor. It's really the only thing I have ever got published. In my next couple of blogs, I will probably put more essays, poems and etc. that I have written on here. See you later.
Sincerely,
Telemoonfa
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
greetings telemoonfa. i have a question for you regarding your letter to the editor. would you take your argument so far as to end school sports? i mean does football academically enlighten anyone? my whole school would shut down so we could loose our football game, which meant i could not get to the libary. which i think is more essential to an education than a football game.
and further what do you consider academic? is theatre an academic pursuit? it goes beyond reading and writing and math and science. where do you draw the line?
Greetings zappalinda. Thanks for your comments.
No, my argument does not go so far as to end school sports. I think involvement in sports and plays goes along way towards teaching artistry, technique, discipline, teamwork, and other good intellectual and social qualities. Plus, the body and the mind are so connected that it's hard to develop one without developing the other.
But seriously, a whole big new $60 million rec. center? And a whole big new $250 fee per student per semester to build the thing? That's outrageous. I think the Arizona Board of Regents was right when they decided that the rec. center shouldn't be funded by tuition and tax money. (I know I'm throwing in a lot of facts that you can't learn about from reading my letter to the editor alone, but so what? If you want to learn more about the issue you can go to NAU's website. But of course from their website they're just gonna show you fancy pictures of the new rec. center and try to convince you how great the whole thing will be.)
But to go back to your last question, "where do you draw the line?"
That's a good question. Experience has taught me that any attempt to write down a forever-binding principle regarding just about anything will fail. For example, even though we write down laws, we still have judges and lawyers to interpret the written word. And even though we have the scriptures, we still need continuos revelation to guide us. I think we need living, breathing, intelligent people to make informed choices in each new situation. So I can't draw the line anywhere, exactly, I just have to use my wisdom in each new scenario.
As far as higher education is concerned, we need administraters who are primarily concerned with the education of the students, and research and development, and academic things like that.
So, I will not attempt to say anything like, "Sports teams are OK but rec. centers are not." I just think that right now, in this particular situation, the rec. center should not be built at NAU.
Thank you for your comments. I like a good discussion.
telemoonfa. this is slightly off topic but i must say it is interesting that you claim "any attempt to write down a forever-binding principle regarding just about anything will fail." when a most of the mormon religion is dictated by forever-binding principles. as are the majority of religions. and since you claim we need living beathing people to consider each situation indepently, then how can you justify turning to an 2000 year old book written by people long dead and gone who have no grasp on current society?
thanks again for your comment, zap. Here's one reason that a written "forever-binding" prinicple will one day not be as meaningful as it was when it was first written: Language changes over time and there's nothing any of us can do about it. It will take thousands of years, but I think English as we know it will eventually become extinct.
I think the mormon religion is in the wonderful position of having both the written down wisdom and revelations of the past and the current writings and wisdom of the modern-day prophets. With these two sources of information, and the Holy Ghost, members of the church can be informed and wise and they can also use good judgement. I hope these comments help.
Post a Comment