Click to read about the best places to eat on campus, freshman packing tips, and how to keep in touch with friends.

Letters to the Editor 11/1

Give readers all the facts on birth control

While I agree with some parts of Stefanie Green’s feature story on birth control in the 21st century, I must mention that the story was lacking several crucial types of birth control currently available, such as contraceptive foams and dental dams.

It also fails to mention the protective elements of condoms for eliminating sexually transmitted diseases, something birth control pills, Orthro Evra Patches and Nuva Rings have yet to accomplish.

While I did enjoy the article for the elementary way in which it explained each method in easy-to-understand terminology, it is my opinion that Ms. Green would have been more effective if she had taken a deeper approach with the article and also discussed the downfalls and negative aspects of each of these new contraceptives.

I personally would love to see a follow-up story that interviews users of each method and gives me a first-person perspective on the good and bad qualities of each product. In this way, I would have better knowledge of my chosen form of birth control.

Kimberly Worstell is a USF student.

Atheism cannot be blamed for atrocities

This is in response to Adam Fowler’s letter in Tuesday’s edition of The Oracle. I am wondering what sick belief justifies his comments that atheism is the “root of the horrible human rights violations?”

Blaming the atrocities of Third World countries on atheism is ridiculous, judgmental and ignorant. As a Christian, as I assume you are by your words, aren’t you not supposed to judge others for their beliefs, or lack thereof?

Since you can’t seem to follow that simple rule of your dogma, I ask you to give me one specific example of human rights violations in these communist countries you talk about that are a direct result of atheism.

If you name atheism as a religion, how many countries can you name where the national religion is atheism? Not a single one, I assure you. Looking at history, I see proof that religions that believe in gods are generally more prone to genocide than historical atheists.

You also make the indirect accusation that atheists do not know right from wrong or good from evil. Atheists do recognize human rights. They simply do not believe man was given said rights by God. It is a natural right that we accept as humans.

Atheists have morals just as rigid as Christians do, and sometimes more so because they have no one to judge them except themselves.

Atheists are people just like you, as much as you would hate to believe it. Isn’t the ideal Christian one who can live the word of God in today’s world?

Unfortunately, as you have so excellently proven, those who can do that are few and far between. It’s the Christians like you that made me reject the church.

Siobhan White is a sophomore majoring in literature.

Team effort won World Series

This letter is in response to Mr. Luong’s letter entitled “Angels won Series by ‘cowardly’ means.”

I just wanted Mr. Luong and all who share his opinion to tell me why they believe that. I am pretty sure that when I was playing baseball it was still a team sport.

Mr. Luong states that the Angels “knew Bonds would hit a home run.” My guess would be that they didn’t pitch to him because of this “fact.”

The Angels deserved to win the World Series, and that is why they won it.

I know that you believe that Barry Bonds, not the Giants, should have won. The fact of the matter is that the other eight guys didn’t get it done.

The Angels gave them a free base runner, and no one could do any thing about it. Any athlete knows that as much as physical talent means on the field, it won’t do you too much good without some knowledge of what you are trying to accomplish and some discipline to get it done.

The Angels chose to put a runner on base, they used the past as a reference. Why would they have even thought of pitching to a guy who could hurt them when they had other options?

They should be honored, maybe with a World Championship.

Adam Smith is a senior majoring in civil engineering.

War caused by U.S. imperialism

War against the infidels. War against the natives. War against fascism. War against communism. And now, war against terrorism. It’s the same dead bodies, dying under different names, but all for the same reason: imperialism. Sept. 11, 2001 pushed the threshold for U.S. imperialism.

In the past, we have destroyed and “rebuilt” societies (Chile, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan) against the people’s wishes. Iraq is our next target, then possibly North Korea. Who’s next, Canada? All these targets serve one main interest: profits.

You can see Bush’s war isn’t a new war, it has been a 12-year systematic struggle to control Iraqi oil. Over these 12 years, we have devastated the civilian infrastructure. Sept. 11 just gave us a reason to speed up our process.

It is very obvious this is not a war against terrorism or for human rights. We can all remember that Saddam Hussein gassed his own people, but do we remember it was when he was our ally, using our gas? Do we really think Iraqis want our democracy? Do we really think we have a democracy?

Hussein should be tried in an international war court, along with Bush, Cheney and the gang. Attacking Iraq without provocation is an impeachable offense.

You cannot destroy a country to go after one man, like we did in Afghanistan, nor attack because you believe that country may have weapons that may (but not very likely) attack America or Israel. Wake up. Stop the Bush war machine.

How much blood will you spill for a quart of oil?

Anthony Schmidt is a sophomore majoring in anthropology.

Word choice for letter not accurate

Thank you for publishing my letter. But why on Earth did the editor insert “of bipartisanship” into the second paragraph? This changes the entire meaning. Bipartisanship means that people are working together across party lines, which is exactly what I’m saying the BOT is not doing.

This change is not only unnecessary but is quite subversive to the actual point of the letter. The Oracle, not I, inserted this phrase and made nonsense of the sentence.

Elizabeth Bird is a professor in the anthropology department.