Martin Sanford makes a valid argument on the need for diverse opinions both in life and on the editorial page, but I think he missed Tim’s point.

It’s not that we are “sick and tired” of the debate, necessarily, but that we ARE tired of the level of discourse, which rarely rises above that of the elementary school-yard.

There is the occasional letter that presents its argument rationally, in an even-handed tone and with some logical support.

The majority, however, are — at best — thinly veiled personal attacks on whomever they are responding to.

They are full of sweeping, unsupported statements, quotations pulled out of context or misremembered and blatant non-sequitors.

It seems that most letter-writers see the opinion page as nothing more than a place to vent their spleen on any topic at hand, rather than as forum for a rational dialectic that has some hope of resolving the issues involved.

It’s not that readers want to stifle debate or crush diversity of opinion, we would just like to see some evidence of maturity, intellect and, perhaps, just a hint that those people writing the letters were actually conscious and attentive during any part of their college career.

Raymond Jasinski

Senior

English