Freedom

Cal State Northridge's decision to bar a Carl's Jr. franchise from its campus is a blow to this country's basic foundation and shows what complete wimps CSUN officials are. Everyone in the United States is entitled to freedom of belief and expression. The CSUN students vehemently demand that their opinions be the only ones that count and that Mr. Karcher has no right to his personal beliefs. Poppycock! The franchise should have been allowed to open and students whose opinions differ from Mr. Karcher's could have simply stayed away.

Re "County Supervisors' Bid to Stifle Gadfly Draws Fire," Nov. 26: It seems that anyone who exercises the hard-won right to freedom of speech is deemed a gadfly, traitor or worse. I recall a couple of stifled gadflies named Jefferson and Franklin who stirred up trouble with the previous "Mad" King George. They decided to put their objections in writing. It began, "When in the course of human events.... " Tony Pereslete Culver City

Re "English Teacher Arrested After Showing R-Rated Film to Class," March 7. I agree with school officials in Santa Paula who chose to have one of their teachers arrested for showing the film "American Beauty" to her students. Now it turns out she also had them reading William Blake. Freedom like that leads to all sorts of mischief and you end up with kids really examining their lives and culture rather than learning to score well on tests. This, in turn, would have dire consequences for the vocational education system that produces such fine ciphers for corporate America.

Robert J. Cottrol (Commentary, Nov. 7) reiterates the argument that gun ownership is necessary to defend individual freedom. Fair enough. However, I have this question for Cottrol and everyone else who parrots this argument: When are you planning to start? Cottrol thoughtfully lays out some examples of how our freedom is being compromised daily in this country, and yet there hasn't been a peep out of the gun lobby on any of this. What was the response to the massacre at Columbine? Calls to regulate movies--a flagrant violation of the 1st Amendment--and a bill allowing the Ten Commandments to be posted in public schools--an even more flagrant violation of the 1st Amendment.

I am often troubled by sentiments expressed by people like Uday Devaskar (letter, Sept. 25). If it is true that the U.S. makes up 5% of the world's population and consumes 30% of its resources, did Devaskar ever consider the true reasons of why this came to be? Could it be that because we are a freedom-loving, democratic society that has worked very hard that we have come to this place in the world? Could it be that many of the countries with the starving children have corrupt governments that have taken the economic aid we have sent to them and squandered it?

Re "House Backs Amendment to Outlaw Flag Desecration," June 4: The irony is apparently lost on Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-San Diego), who questions the patriotism of those opposing his flag measure. Didn't he himself say that the "flag represents freedoms, traditions and liberties"? Do we need more laws to enforce patriotism? Are Republicans more American than Democrats? I think they would have us believe so. Christine Sanchez Los Angeles

In your story on the lingerie shop's revealing billboard (June 16), Santa Clarita Mayor George Pederson expresses his sympathy with those residents opposed to it, but he states, "The First Amendment is still in place." I am opposed to the First Amendment's being used as a tool to protect advertising. The billboard in question is a purchased communication with only one purpose behind it--to sell. It is not an application of an inalienable right which the power of our freedom of speech is drawn from.

Re "Radical Islam -- globalization for losers," Opinion, April 27 Jonah Goldberg writes that "in the war on terrorism, America is on the side of freedom and diversity." Nonsense. Open markets and cheap labor have been the goals of American foreign policy for decades, and local cultures and economies have been thoroughly and repeatedly trampled by corporate invasions. American leadership has simply ignored human rights concerns until they coincided with the geopolitical aims of the Bush administration.

While vacationing in Baja California, my husband and I were able to tune in an L.A. radio station to find the Supreme Court had indeed upheld the Pennsylvania law severely limiting women's reproductive rights and was only one vote shy of overturning Roe vs. Wade. When we later rolled across the border, I resented the fact that I was returning to my country with less freedom than I left with the previous week. As I caught up on the news reported during my absence, I found your June 30 article ("Abortion Decision Divides Rival Camps")

The complaints lodged by atheists ("Atheists Decry Post-Attack Focus on God," Oct. 6) that the U.S. government has been blurring the line between church and state since the Sept. 11 tragedies are echoed by many people such as myself, who consider themselves spiritual but don't follow organized religion in any form. President Bush and the U.S. government have been alienating a large number of people who don't agree with such presumptuous statements as Bush's "God is not neutral," along with the hypocritical stance the government has taken by claiming the moral high ground against terrorism, while for decades the U.S. has been one of the largest financiers and trainers of "freedom fighters" (terrorists)