Murphy should not dismiss religion hastily
I was intrigued by Mike Murphy's column on religion, TV and his friend's call to seminary (""Religion finds network TV, friend's future,"" Jan. 30). Mr. Murphy's childhood experience with religion seems very similar to those of many in our culture. What is wrong with the Christian religion that it turns so many away even at such a young age? Murphy answers that question: Religion is a bunch of old men in robes condemning homosexuality, womens' rights and so on and so forth. As a result, atheists abound. But I have to ask Murphy, are you really an atheist? At the age of 12, did you possess the critical faculties to determine that no supreme intelligent being can exist? Many people today judge religion prematurely; before even an intellectual understanding is obtained, people wholeheartedly reject religion.
I admit that Murphy's portrayal of religion is not inaccurate. Christianity can be a baneful affair, but only when one does not understand it fully. Jesus Christ did not come to establish an institutionalized system of religion. His purpose was to draw humankind to God through love. Christianity could be better characterized as a spirituality rather than a religion, a spirituality as powerful and enlightening as Buddhism or yoga or any kind of new-age mysticism.
In the end, I encourage Mr. Murphy to abandon his preconceived notions of religion and to talk to his seminary-bound friend in order to discover what his friend's spirituality is really about.
Wal-Mart succeeds due to simple economics
Michael Hsu's editorial on Wal-Mart (""Wal-Mart tramples small-town memories,"" Jan. 28) is part of the standard Madison repertoire: ""Big Business is Evil."" As in many other scenarios, I wonder how educated the Madison opinion really is. There is a reason Wal-Mart is succeeding. I often hear stories of communities complaining of a new Wal-Mart being built in their area. They scream, ""We don't want it!"" However, when it moves in, it is invariably successful. Obviously, it does offer something to the community. If it is this successful it must be serving the needs of a large group of people. If other businesses go under when it moves in, they must not be as valuable. This is capitalism. If you want to stop Wal-Mart from expanding, you are eliminating competition. The reason they should be able to try the market is because of high school economics. Simple economics shows that larger production can lower the price of merchandise, and in this case, it does.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart, but for my own reasons. For example, I refuse to buy music there because it is censored. I don't care that so many other people seem to like it. It's their right. I just ask that there be no hypocrisy about it. If you scream about it moving in, don't shop there when it opens. If it succeeds without your business, it's filling the needs of someone else. If your favorite store closes because of Wal-Mart, then the other former shoppers found something they prefer more. Who are you to deny them this?
SERF's weights policy detrimental to women
I am concerned about the Southeast Recreational Facility's policy of keeping the small hand weights (12 pounds and less) in the second floor equipment room. This policy makes working out dangerous and inefficient for anyone who uses the small weights. Moreover, this policy discriminates against women, as they are the main users of the small weights.
I was told the small weights are kept in the equipment room because of problems with theft; however, this is inconsistent with the fact that the small annular weight plates (2.5, 5 and 10 pounds), which are predominantly used by men, are freely available in the weight room.
This policy endangers the users of the SERF. After checking out the hand weights, one must carry them from the second floor equipment room to the first floor weight room. It is not easy to negotiate the stairwell and two doorways while carrying, for example, two 12-pound weights; indeed, one has no choice but to balance one weight between her elbow and hip while using her free hand to manage each door. This is an accident waiting to happen; one could easily drop a weight on her foot or somebody else's while fumbling with the doors. Moreover, people who wish to avoid the hassle of going upstairs to check out weights use the small annular plates as hand weights. As it is impossible to get a firm grip on an annular plate, it is simply a matter of time until somebody drops a 10-pound weight on her head, resulting in a serious injury or worse.
In addition, it is inconvenient and inefficient to be forced to run up and down the stairs to check out weights. Many people exercise with several different sets of weights, but this is simply too cumbersome at the SERF; it is literally impossible to negotiate the stairwell and doorways while carrying four hand weights.
I reiterate that this policy discriminates against and endangers the women as they are the main users of the small weights. I strongly encourage amendment to this policy so that exercising at the SERF is equally safe and convenient for all users.
