Editorial on sexuality course off base
I am shocked and dismayed by the editorial regarding the WNC Human Sexuality course at WNC, published in the Jan. 29 Nevada Appeal. It is not the conclusion that shocks.
Instead, it is the nature of the argumentation that is dismaying - the complete disregard of the role of critical thinking and data gathering in forming reasoned opinions, the belief that the editor's opinions override those of the university regents, the labeling of personal conversations and experiences as the majority of opinion, the dismissal of the viewpoints of more than 60 former students of the course and numerous faculty throughout the Nevada System of Higher Education.
But most of all, I am shocked and dismayed that the editors are ignoring the main role of any form of higher education - to open minds and challenge adult students to contemplate new ideas, a process not always supported by community consensus.
Indeed, once upon a time, various communities across our great nation did not want to educate women or African-Americans, they did not want to discuss comparative religion or literature not written by white males, and they certainly didn't think a student could be educated over a distance.
Over the past several decades, we the community have proven the community consensus wrong in each of these cases. Perhaps because it was not the community that held these opinions, but instead a few vocal, powerful, or well-positioned individuals, hardly a consensus at all.
Jennifer M. Verive
Part-time faculty, Western Nevada College
Editorial on WNC class ignored the facts
Regarding "Human Sexuality Course Goes Too Far," your editorial writer acknowledges that an independent investigator concluded that Kubistant had done nothing wrong and that a group of his students had submitted fervent endorsements of the professor and the class.
It does not appear that your writer had taken the class, read the class description or read the waiver each student must read and sign before being allowed to take the class. Nonetheless, your writer concludes that another investigation be conducted and helpfully suggests that the investigation should conclude that some of the class is inappropriate.
Your writer ignores whatever facts may have been found by the investigator and does a disservice to the numerous individuals who have taken the class and have come forward to strongly support the professor against the allegations of a solitary student.
Your opinion is not based on fact, is reckless and has caused harm to the person whom it appears may be the true victim in this matter, Professor Tom Kubistant.
The Appeal owes Professor Kubistant an apology.
Jim Spencer
Minden
Happy that 'Family Circus' comic strip returned
Thanks for returning "The Family Circus" comic strip.
Mary Bangert
Carson City
Thank you for bringing back cartoons
Thank you for bringing back Family Circus and Garfield. My favorite is Pickles, and I also enjoy Tina's Groove. Maybe you can locate Buckles, the strip about a little dog. It is so cute.
Marjorie Hopkins
Silver Springs
Sad that 'Family Circus' returned to comics
Regarding Bonnie Matton's letter, it just goes to show how people's tastes differ. I was so relieved to see that the Nevada Appeal had eliminated "The Family Circus" from its publication. I've always found it to be innocuous.
By the way, "Bizarro" has always been a favorite. Different strokes for different folks.
Betty Kalicki
Carson City
• Editor's note: With these letters, we'll thank you all for your comments and conclude the debate over the funnies.