We've got mail

October 16, 2003

Document Tools

Print This Article

E-mail This Page

Font Size
S      M      L      XL

Related Stories

Same-sex opinion not for convocation I'm writing to complain about the opinion piece published in the convocation issue of SFU News (Oct. 2). Charles Crawford's piece on same-sex marriage while thought provoking, should not have been published in the convocation issue. The first problem stems from the fact, that regardless of the editor's note on the side of the column, the piece may be construed as being representative of the university community at large. When all of the attendants at the convocation cermonies are given a copy free with their convocation schedule, I would have thought that better care would have been taken in selecting articles. The second issue is the offence that it may have caused with some of our guests. While I support free speech and the democratic process, I question the value of publishing a controversial article that may offend a great deal of people on a day which is otherwise cause for celebration. For me, the article had the same effect of insulting a couple at their own wedding. While the insult may be correct (and in the case of the Crawford article this is by no means a clear situation) the timing is vastly inappropriate. Had their been same-sex couples in the audience, or as graduands, there is a strong possibility that they may have been severely offended by the article's content. I would like to extend my personal apology to the queer and queer-friendly community for what might have been construed as offensive material, possibly ruining a special day for many people. I hope that in the future more care will be taken when selecting the date on which articles are published. Alexandre Leger MA candidate, Latin American studies Editor's note: The Oct. 2 edition of SFU News coincided with convocation. It was not a convocation issue.

Search SFU News Online