Scientology displayed

[Re: Scientology on display, News, April 23] The only thing more disturbing than the Church of Scientologys presence in the atrium of the Concordia library last week is the university administrations laissez-faire attitude about the indiscriminate rental of its common spaces. Its completely inappropriate that Concordia spokesperson Christine Mota encourages members of the university community to get a grip and chill while access to our library is given over to anyone who can afford the price.

The attention of university students is a valuable commodity for any number of organizations seeking to recruit and influence young adults. The university bears a responsibility to ensure that access to the student body is not abused by those with dubious motives. Mota suggests, If you can't deal with this stuff in an academic institution, where can you? But therein lies the problem. The university did not deal with the controversial messages and intentions of the Church of Scientologys exhibit whatsoever. They ignored the numerous complaints and concerns voiced by students and faculty members and failed to provide any forum for debate or for the expression of counter perspectives.

The message from the administration to the university community seems clear: free speech comes at a price in the halls of Concordia. Either chill out or be prepared to pay for the privilege of voicing your concern, otherwise the administration isnt listening.

(Like the student you interviewed in your article, I too am concerned about the retaliation measures the Church of Scientology is known to take against anyone who criticizes their practices, and therefore feel I need to remain anonymous).

>>An anonymous Concordia faculty member

Congratulations on this report. This sort of professional, relatively even-handed reporting on a display by the Scientology-inspired “Citizens Commission on Human Rights” at Concordia University is a far better, and in the long run more effective, response to a challenge of this kind than censorship (in this case by the university) would have been.

>>Harvey Shepard

Too many people

[Re: Eat the fat, Letters, April 23] Ed Binders tongue-in-cheek letter suggests cannibalism as a solution to ease the global problems of overpopulation and critical shortage of food. It may sound strange, but the fact is that even now, in vast parts of Africa, India and the Islamic world, many people still refuse to acknowledge that there is any kind of overpopulation crisis facing the world. They refuse to accept that overpopulation causes poverty, food shortage and often severe environmental degradation.

In Africa and many Islamic nations, many folks believe the scare of overpopulation is actually a conspiracy theory by the Western nations to try to control the population of the non-European races. Just as millions of Africans still refuse to acknowledge the severity of the AIDS crisis, many Islamic fundamentalists in Muslim nations and Hindu fundamentalists in India still downplay the overpopulation crisis. As I write, the Taliban are gaining strength in Pakistan and are coming closer to extending their power across the nuclear bomb-powered nation of 170 million people. (And of course, the Taliban do not believe in any kind of birth control, or rights for women.)

How can the world solve its problems of hunger and overpopulation if so many citizens in populous countries remain obsessed by religion or tradition and refuse to acknowledge the grave problems caused by too many people?

>>Michael Fremlin

Too many cars

Regarding Ed Binder’s cockamamie solution for overpopulation and famine—structured cannibalism. In truth, there is no distant danger of world overpopulation so long as everyone doesn’t own an automobile. This space-hogging wasteful implement of supposedly civil folks should be curtailed, resulting in extensively more liveable land.

The mantra of conservationists is “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.” Of these, “Reduce” is most important. Quality-of-life is not dependent on wasting.   Moreover, turn off that goddam leaf-blower, cell phone and motorcycle for a more liveable, enjoyable environment!

>>Edward Abramic

Correction: In our review of Fast and Furious, we mistakenly stated that Rosario Dawson’s character was killed off, thus infuriating Vin Diesel who sets out for revenge. It was in fact, Michelle Rodriguez’s character that was killed off, not Rosario Dawson.

WE WELCOME LETTERS TO THE EDITOR!