Letters in the Editor's Mailbag.

Byline: The Register-Guard

No moral equivalency

DeAnna Conley's statement (letters, Feb. 23) that "it is hard to determine which of these (Enron or Osama bin Laden) has destroyed more lives" is a ridiculous exercise in hyperbole. Is she so blinded by anti-corporate zealotry that she can no longer tell the difference between losing one's 401(k) and losing a family member to terrorism?

I'm astounded that anyone could be so callous as to attempt to make some moral equivalency between the two. But then again, this is Eugene. Maybe it's not so astounding after all.

LAWRENCE RUSSELL Eugene

Defining 'terrorist'

We have been waging war to reduce terrorism for nearly six months now, and I am still not sure what a terrorist is.

Is a terrorist someone who fights for a cause using only violence? Is a terrorist someone who will do whatever it takes to achieve a set goal? Is a terrorist a terrorist forever, or only when using or planning violence? All of these questions could easily fit how much of the rest of the world views our CIA and military.

With more and more military "mistakes" harming non-terrorists in Afghanistan, are we looking like the terrorists more and more with our narrow focus (Osama bin Laden's death), with serious violence inflicted from afar (remote-controlled warplanes) and with the prolonged use of violence? I want a clear definition of what a terrorist is, so the United States can stay away from this label.

As it is, with President George W. Bush's own father (and a former president) being a former head of the CIA, many in the Middle East see us as the terrorists and will continue to fight us because of our actions. Let's define the standards that a larger world body, the United Nations perhaps, would agree meet the definition of a terrorist, then seek only those who behave in this manner, including those within our own country. Let's make certain we have clear justification to enter other countries with our military specialists and have clear, attainable goals that will signify when our mission is done and we can leave.

The tragedy of Sept. 11 has awakened our fighting spirit, but we must also awaken our brains. We must define what it is we are seeking, make certain we are not becoming what we fear, and honor those in our country who died a senseless death by living with our morals intact.

JEFF HUSTON Springfield

Athletics have place

In his Feb. 24 commentary on "Sports vs. Academics," University of Oregon Professor James Earl says that a philosopher might ask the question, "Quid universitas cum ludis?" What does a university have to do with games?

In reply, I would say with Juvenal, "Mens sana in corpore sano" - "A sound mind in a sound body." That is an ideal to which the ancients - and every sensible person since - has enthusiastically subscribed. (An ideal, perhaps, for Earl to contemplate when he brags that he'd rather "sit down than work out.")

Earl is of course free to question whether the UO is spending too much on football and not enough on academics - or perhaps, that more should be spent on the athletic development of the student body as a whole. But what puts him beyond the pale is when he says that sports have no place in higher education at all.

Earl views himself as an idealist. I'm more inclined to compare him to the stuffy puritans who dominated American universities during the early years of our republic. Puritan professors strongly resisted student demands for athletics. They, too, felt that athletics had no place in an academic setting. Their official reason was that athletics were rowdy and "ungentlemanly" - but I suspect that their real reason was that they couldn't stand the thought of people enjoying themselves.

Earl can pout all he wants, but the fact remains that we live in a world where more people are going to be introduced to the University of Oregon and the opportunities it offers by watching our fine football team than by watching one of his English classes in action.

THOMAS C. STEWART Eugene

Benefits of sin taxes

John Charles' guest column on sin taxes overlooked a few facts (Register-Guard, Feb. 22).

First, if we are concerned with smuggling of cigarettes, Oregon should raise its tax on cigarettes. As he points out, Washington has one of the highest tobacco taxes in the country. If we leave our tax where it is, it will encourage the smuggling that he decries.

Second, most of the tax that was added by Measure 44 supports the Oregon Health Plan, which provides health care for poorer Oregonians, many of whom are made ill from smoking.

Third, the diminishing revenue from the cigarette tax is due to less smoking among Oregonians. This is shown by surveys of Oregonians. We should consider this good news, not bad.

ANTHONY BIGLAN, Senior scientist

Oregon Research Institute Eugene

CAPTION(S):

The Register-Guard welcomes letters on topics of general interest. Our length limit is 250 words; all letters are subject to condensation. Writers are limited to one letter per calendar month. Because of the volume of mail, not all letters can be printed. Letters must be signed with the writer's full name. An address and daytime telephone number are needed for verification purposes; this information will not be published or released. Mail letters to Mailbag, P.O. Box 10188, Eugene, OR 97440-2188 Fax: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail]