Troop support does not

extend to hostilities
I am told to “Support our Troops” now that war has begun. I say, it all depends on what you mean. I want our troops out of harm’s way. I support them in their right to choose the military, their feeling that they are doing their patriotic duty and in their thinking that they are doing good. But I don’t support them for what, at the president’s orders, they are doing in Iraq.
I oppose their hostile entering of a country without international support. I don’t support them in their killing of Iraqis, both soldiers and innocent civilians. And I oppose them in their inevitable destroying of at least some infrastructure and resources that will lead to miseries in the future. Please don’t look at me strangely if I can’t unequivocally agree that “But, of course, all citizens can and should support our troops.” Or at least that’s what any regular person would say.

Neil Wollman

senior fellow

Peace Studies Institute

Jones death coverage

sensitive, compassionate
I am very moved by the Emerald’s follow-up stories about the events surrounding the tragic death of Eric Dylan Jones. It is important that we reflect and learn from our actions to avoid unnecessary harm against others. The Emerald’s coverage shows a profound sensitivity, maturity and compassion in being able to evaluate oneself in a critical and constructive manner, as hard as it may be. I truly hope that Mike Bellotti and the Eugene Police Department have the courage to accept the same challenge.

Bryan Moore

Spanish instructor

Women deserve accurate

abortion information
Tuesday’s Emerald supplied an advertising supplement funded by an anti-choice faction. This 12-page insert attempted to sway women in rejecting the possibility of abortion through false statistics and scare tactics.
According to one article in the supplement, abortion leads to breast cancer. However, the National Cancer Institute stated in their 2003 report that “the strongest statistical evidence shows no link between abortion and breast cancer.” Additionally, a 2000 study published in Epidemiology affirmed that there is no risk of breast cancer among women who have chosen abortion, nor does cancer risk increase with a larger number of reported induced abortions.
I strongly believe that information should be provided to females about the strengths and weaknesses of abortion techniques. However, I feel that it is unjust to provide falsified material to women in order to sway their opinions.

Sarah A. Koski

sophomore

political science and international studies

HLA Pro Life should help with childcare, housing costs
On April 2, a group called HLA Pro Life added a ‘special’ advertising section to the Emerald in a openly biased, subversively religious manner.
While it is true that abortion has touched many lives, it has helped many people who would not have otherwise been able to properly care for a child. Many of these same people would seek alternative venues to have abortions, possibly to the detriment of the mother as well as the child. Why doesn’t HLA Pro Life spend money helping single parents so that they can afford to have these children instead of aborting them? What a novel idea for the religious right! Or, if targeting students anyway, help subsidize childcare and housing for student-parents?
Maybe more students would consider having children instead of aborting them, and HLA can provide positive reinforcement for making what they believe is a ‘right’ decision. Instead, I am saddened for those that have to encounter this belittling, shame inducing rhetoric of fear and rekindle the pain of their decision.
By chastising those would-be mothers with worthless propaganda, HLA only succeeds in injuring everyone’s spirit. I, for one, say shame on HLA.

Andrew Ettinger

senior

computer sciences