Student Publications
University of Houston
151C Communications Bldg
Houston, TX 77204-4015
713.743.5350

©1991-2007
Student Publications,
All rights reserved.

Last modified:

Contact:
ktruitt@uh.edu

Opinion
 

Letters to the Editor

Student insurance is beneficial

To the editor:

I'm writing in response to "Students claim insuring is costly," (News, Wednesday) in which one student, Ofure Oiboh, was quoted as saying, "I've never really used it, so I don't see the (necessity) of it." 

I sincerely hope that Oiboh never has to see the necessity of student health insurance. I am the mother of 2004 UH graduate and former Daily Cougar managing editor Christian Schmidt. He did have to use his student insurance in a life-threatening situation that required hospitalization and follow-up care and testing. We are extremely grateful he had access through his insurance not only to the health center, but to hospitals and specialists in the Houston area. The costs covered by the insurance would have paid his insurance bill for more than a dozen years. Christian has now totally recovered and is working as a sports writer in Natchez, Miss.

May Schmidt
Austin, Texas

A question of faith and science

To the editor:

In response to the column in Monday's paper ("Evolution revolution hits public schools," Opinion), I believe Derek Dickson is missing the point of the controversy. The question is whether to present "intelligent design" as a scientific theory. Most proponents of "intelligent design" want the theory presented as an alternate view to evolution in science classes. 

The problem with this, outside of the constitutionality of it, is how "intelligent design" should be presented. Where I went to high school, we had a biblical literature class in which the idea was discussed. The inherent problem in bringing up intelligent design in the classroom is it blurs what science is. Scientific theory needs to be able to be tested and scrutinized with evidence. This is outside the realm of faith.

Your argument would be OK if you were to separate the two viewpoints, but trying to put intelligent design in a biology class is intellectually dishonest and misleading. 

On top of all of this, the reason God is not mentioned in the classroom is to protect religion, not oppress it. The minute you start allowing your God in the classroom, someone else's is left out, and this can lead to a lot of problems. The founding fathers understood this, and to protect your religion, they tried to keep it out of public policy.

There is a place for intelligent design, evolution, the theory the Earth is flat or whatever, but we need to be careful where these are discussed and under what context. I believe a lot of people use intelligent design as a Trojan horse of sorts for Christianity, and that frightens me. 

Ryan Croke
graduate, mathematics

To the editor:

I felt that the column, "Evolution revolution hits public schools," (Opinion, Monday) unfairly favored intelligent design. Unfortunately, these interest groups are seeking to disprove evolution and replace it with an updated form of creationism -- a theory that has been scientifically debunked. This "intelligent design" seeks to prove that because so many facets of the universe we live in are complex beyond current reasoning, they must have been created by a higher power.

This debate, however, is the only one that currently exists in regards to evolution. Nearly all scientists believe in the theory of evolution and consider it fundamentally important for the basis of biological and anthropological study. What's more, a scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world, supported by facts, laws and tested hypotheses. Among other scientific theories are atomic theory, cell theory, the theory of light and my personal favorite, the theory of gravity. Why are these theories spared opposition, and evolution is not?

Creationists' arguments and the arguments of intelligent design have also been found to be equivalent, further detracting from their validity. Both of these groups feel that evolution is poised in opposition to religion despite the fact that the theory of evolution sponsors neither the absence nor presence of a creator. In their misguided attempt to put God into science, they are risking the confusion of their own children. To allow children of no more than 14 or 15 to be able to chose between a science and a religion, when reasonably, they can have both, is inconsiderate and dangerous on the part of the parents and school boards.

Shawn Bates
freshman, creative writing

Letters to the editor are welcome from all members of the UH community and should focus on issues, not personalities. Letters must be typed and must include the author's name, telephone number and affiliation with the University. Anonymous letters will not be published. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, language and space. Letters may be delivered in person to Room 151, Communication; e-mailed to dclettrs@mail.uh.edu ; or faxed to (713) 743-5384.